[ietf-dkim] Re: dkim service
mike at mtcc.com
Thu Oct 13 17:14:20 PDT 2005
Douglas Otis wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2005, at 4:20 PM, Jim Fenton wrote:
> This relates to one of the motivations for multiple signatures. If
>> you have a non-mangling mailing list, you might want to preserve the
>> original signature, because it's still valid and some people might
>> want to base a decision on that. They (or others) might want to know
>> for sure that it came from the list, because they want to make sure
>> that they read all messages on the list. A WG chair might have that
>> concern, for example.
> Agreed, but how would you ensure the sequence of the keys?
I don't understand the need for sequencing at all. If
a signature binds to an address you care about, that's
goodness. If multiple do, I'm not sure that it makes
any difference to the receiver because it's coming from
the same "authority" (ie, the domain).
More information about the ietf-dkim