Charles, I was showing what already is written and suggesting that it might need clarification.
Charles Lindsey wrote: > On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 05:09:53 +0100, Hector Santos <hsan...@isdg.net> wrote: > >> This probably means that it should clarified what that 5.4 sentence >> means and also the next section 5.5 >> >> 5.5. Recommended Signature Content >> >> .. >> >> The following header fields SHOULD be included in the signature, if >> they are present in the message being signed: >> >> o From (REQUIRED in all signatures) >> > But that is weaker what what it already says, which implies saying > "h=from" even if NO from is (contrary t0 5322) present. > -- 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
