Eliot Lear wrote: > On 5/21/09 5:45 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: >> There is no concept of "responsibility for information behond l=". > > Sure there is. It is simply "unsigned" beyond the value of l=.
You appear to be confusing the difference between the internals of how DKIM determines whether there is a valid signature, from fine-grained (output) semantics about the message. DKIM merely says that a valid signature is present or it isn't. It makes no statement about differential coverage of the message. Separate from text that defines the verification algorithm, can you point to text in the Signature specification that refers to differential semantics or differential output from the verifier? >>> That was always the implication, right? >> It is no where in the specification and I believe it never was. > > I believe this was explicitly stated elsewhere, like on this list. But that's not in the spec. >>> So now you're a mail firewall and you see lots of URLs tagged at the >>> end, with nobody asserting responsibility. That's an indicator that >>> there is a problem. What one does with that problem is well beyond >>> the scope of DKIM, but one could easily see several different courses >>> of action: >> >> Now you inventing behaviors that go far beyond the specification. > > Well, that is what I wrote (I concede I don't know the difference > between well beyond an far beyond ;-) Maybe lateral vs. vertical? a well can be deep and far can be to the horizon...? >> If such behaviors are necessary to make l= meaningful and useful -- >> and your line of frankly reasonable thinking does seem to imply this, >> though I doubt it was your intention -- then the specification for >> this bit of mechanism is seriously deficient. > > Perhaps, but why do you think so? You've been relying on interpretations that aren't in the specification. If you restrict discussion to only using semantics from the specification (with the Update) then I'm not understanding what value proposition applies. And by the way, my original question was about who is using the feature and finding it valuable. Not about theoretical scenarios, but experience based on two years of possible use. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
