----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry Leiba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As chair, I see a growing consensus to do it that way. Let's try to > resolve this issue tout de suite, and move on. I'd like to hear from > people who think we should have some headers as "MUST sign". I'd like > to hear from those who agree with Mark and Mike, that we should not have > any with "MUST". > > What say you? > See my last message to Eric: http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q3/004249.html I vote for a minimum requirement and expectation that is part of the fundamental email infrastructure. In regards to DKIM, that should be the FROM: (If I had my choice, I would suggest the DATE: too just to be consistent with RFC 2822 minimum requirements). However, I say this from a Domain Signature Authorization point of view which as you know, I am a strong advocate of. It can be "adjustable" if the domain policy says its ok. But I believe this will complicate policy concepts so I vote for a minimum requirement. -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
