On 10/Oct/11 23:20, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ietf.org On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely >> >> Authentication-Results is also missing from feedback-record, which >> might be alright since it is already in rfc822-headers. The spec in >> section 3.1 does not agree with this reasoning, though. > > What's important here (to my mind) is that A-R has to be present in > the report not just in the included message/header, because there > might be more than one in the latter. The one(s) generated by the > reporting host are the ones that need to be in the second MIME part > of the report.
Good point. As an alternative, we could identify the report-triggering results by reference, letting generators declare their authserv-id. For example, adding the following line in the second part of the current example: Authentication-Server-Id: mta1011.mail.tp2.someisp.com This alternative may allow a generator to piecewise write the A-R fields directly to the relevant stream, rather than building them in memory. At the recipient's, this alternative just prevents the embarrassment of choice; e.g., what if the second part's A-R fields seem to differ from their third part's correlatives? _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
