That said, I guess we just do a yes or no vote on shipping this current version of the errata doc.
And then working towards a -bis sometime later once the dust has settled. -srs On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:33 PM, Eliot Lear <l...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Can someone please explain how something can be opaque and yet processed in >> g=, as SM has pointed out? > > Opaque to OTHERS. As long as the g= and i= strings match, that's just > fine. I see no reason why the receiver must do other than a string > match to see that the two are the same. > > g= Granularity of the key (plain-text; OPTIONAL, default is "*"). _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
