John R. Levine wrote: > So, uh, can we agree that Jim's SHOULD language to tell people to do > this is a good idea?
Yes. +1. I think I was the first to agree with Jim's input and didn't see much follow up except you and maybe another person. Maybe Barry can provide a repeat of the exact change proposal and get a preliminary show of hands. Personally? I think from a reader standpoint: Additional 5322.From Exception Paragraph in Section 5.4 after the paragraph about "use the last field found" That is where a reader/developer will begin to scratch his header on what headers to sign and verify. So it needs a quick "by the way" paragraph regarding a special exception for 5322.From against the "use the last field" rule in the previous paragraph. But in the name of moving forward, Jim's text does the job. -- 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
