Hi, unfortunately I didn't have the time to do a full review of 4871bis, but there's one thing I'd like to draw attention to. In the original text of RFC4871 DKIM was described as:
> DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) defines a mechanism by which email > messages can be cryptographically signed, permitting a signing domain > to claim responsibility for the introduction of a message into the > mail stream. In draft 2 of RFC4871bis DKIM is described as: > DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) permits a person, role, or > organization that owns the signing domain to claim some responsibility > for a message by associating the domain with the message. I'm not very happy with the introduction of the word 'some' in front of 'responsibility'. The way it is mentioned now is like one can say 'somewhat dead' or 'a bit pregnant'. More or less undefined. And yes, this 'some' can be determined by reading the entire doc and depends on how DKIM is used, what fields are used for signing etc. But the words 'some responsibility' will not sound very exact nor very attractive to organizations who have to determine whether to invest in DKIM or not. So I suggest to either remove the word 'some' or describe in the same paragraph what this 'some responsibility' exactly means. /rolf _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
