Eliot Lear wrote: >> 8. RFC4871 Section 2.11 Identity Assessor ... >> New: >> The name of the module that consumes DKIM's mandatory payload, >> the >> responsible Signing Domain Identifier (SDID). Other DKIM values >> can also be delivered this module; however this additional >> activity >> is outside the scope of the DKIM signature specification. >> >> > > Replace "Other DKIM values" to "Other information". > > My logic: what the assessor consumes beyond the SDID is outside the > scope of the spec.
Is your concern that the presence of the DKIM qualifier could be taken to /exclude/ other values? The reason for saying DKIM, here, was to make sure the reader knows it's ok for other DKIM-Sig values to be delivered. Without the DKIM reference, the sentence would seem to be so broad as to have truly nothing to do with DKIM. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
