[ietf-dkim] what I said about i= at the DKIM meeting

I was asked to post what I said at the DKIM meeting about opacity and the AUID (i=) value. Take it as input into your thought processes as you consider the issues around the Errata. The following is only slightly expanded over what I said on Tuesday. == Part 1 The definition of i= contains se

Re: [ietf-dkim] what I said about i= at the DKIM meeting

Tony Hansen wrote: > The semantics constrain the AUID to be an identifier for the agent/user. > This MAY be the email address of the agent/user of the message, or it > may be some other value that also represents the identity of the > agent/user but is not an email address of the agent/user. If it