> -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim- > boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 3:18 PM > To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Output requirements > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim- > boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 12:03 PM > > To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org > > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Output requirements > > > > How about mentioning ignored signatures, e.g., > > > > The output MAY include further data, such as properties or result > > meta-data of any signatures, including ignored ones, for use by > > modules that consume those results at any stage of the verification > > process. > > > > (Just to make clear that all the "SHOULD ignore" are not conflicting > > with this.) > > Works for me. >
I suppose I can grudgingly live with this. Mike _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
