Jim Fenton wrote:
> Dave Crocker wrote:
>>>> I don't understand.  What is there in the DKIM signing protocol that 
>>>> requires the author adress to "follow suit"?
>>>>
>>> Not in the signing protocol, but in ADSP.  If an email with a From 
>>> address of, say, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is signed with 
>>> d=transaction.example.com then the signature cannot be an Author 
>>> Signature.
>>
>> I thought we had agreed to defer having the Overview document talk 
>> abut the Signing Practices material until it is standardized?
> 
> Notwithstanding the fact that the Overview Document does currently talk 
> about Signing Practices, we should avoid giving advice that we expect to 
> conflict with Signing Practices, even without mentioning them explicitly.


Hmm.  Well, yeah, -overview does make reference to signing practices a number 
of 
times, albeit in generic and conceptual terms.

If there is text already there that you believe is giving advice we expect to 
conflict with Signing Practices, what text is that, precisely and how does it 
conflict with what we expect?

Apologies if you've already indicated these details, but I've lost track.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to