>The terms "Valid Signature from an Author Domain" and "Author
>Signature" are very easily confused.
I think we're all confused at this point. If the From: address
were a...@example.com and the signature had i...@example.com, that
sure looks like a valid signature from an author domain, but I
don
pasi.ero...@nokia.com wrote:
[...]
> - Subdomains: The following signature is not an Author Signature,
> because the domain taking responsibility for the email ("example.com")
> is not equal to the Author Domain ("eng.example.com").
>
>From: John Doe
>DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 02:20:18PM +0200, pasi.ero...@nokia.com wrote:
>Section 3.2:
>> o If a message has a Valid Signature from an Author Domain, ADSP
>> provides no benefit relative to that domain since the message is
>> already known to be compliant with any possible ADSP for that
>>
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Keys Identified Mail Working Group of
the IETF.
Title : DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Author Domain
Signing Practices (ADSP)
Author(s) : A.
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:21:50 -, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
wrote:
> An update of the extensions draft that focuses exclusively on the X.509
> certs extensions is attached.
> Note that even though this is intended to be an individual submission,
> comments from others are welcome. The point o
(Continuing from my previous email):
The terms "Valid Signature from an Author Domain" and "Author
Signature" are very easily confused. If I understood Doug's comments
right, he's essentially proposing making these two terms identical.
That would certainly simplify things, but since the WG h
I've gone through the IETF last call comments for ADSP.
I've understood that the major issues raised by Doug have been
discussed in the WG earlier, and the WG reached rough consensus
on them.
If that's the case, I have no problem with it. However, after reading
Doug's comments together with R
