> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott 
> Kitterman
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 10:26 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-as-08.txt
> 
> My comment against your proposed fix (probably is/i.e.) is still
> applicable to this version.

8.6 says "is probably a forgery" and includes at the end "(e.g., a message that 
is also DKIM-signed by the same domain, and that signature validates)".  Was 
that not it?

(e.g. is more correct than i.e., I believe, since there could be other cases.)

-MSK
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to