On 10/6/2010 8:00 AM, Steve Atkins wrote: > It also changes what DKIM means, ... > Either the message has a valid DKIM signature, or it does not. If the > signature is valid, then the signing domain takes responsibility for the > message, subtly malformed or not. Just because the message lacks a Date: > header or has bare linefeeds doesn't mean that the signing domain isn't > responsible for it.
THis is a particularly clean and precise attention to DKIM's job, nicely filtering out issues that are not part of DKIM's job. In particular, it makes the multiple From: issue entirely irrelevant to DKIM. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
