Scott Kitterman wrote: >> My Technical recommendation. >> >> 1) For 4871bis, we should consider relaxing the 5322.From >> binding requirement from a MUST to a SHOULD. This will help >> justify its new words of "separating the signer domain from >> the author domain." There is no separation until the 5322.From >> binding requirement is relaxed. >
> As discussed during the original DKIM development effort, this > is about protecting content from modification. The base DKIM spec > already doesn't treat 5322.from specially, so such a change in not > needed to meet your specified goal. Excuse me if I don't understand your reading. 5322.From is the only header that is required hashing. Is that not a special consideration? I think it will serve the community interest to find out why this large MTA vendor revised there open source software three years later presumably after extensive field operations to include a new option to relaxed the 5322.From binding. > - 1. Thanks for your input. -- Hector Santos, CTO http://www.santronics.com http://santronics.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
