On Thursday, September 16, 2010 03:23:15 am Hector Santos wrote: > 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.
Finding out why sounds reasonable. What you propose isn't finding out why, but assuming it's valuable without bothering to find out. Scott K _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
