[ietf-dkim] Which tags are required?

[Tony Hansen]

Barry Leiba wrote:
> While we're here, I'll point out something I missed until Paul set this
> sentence out separately: the sentence's negative is done badly, leaving
> it open to misinterpretation (it looks like it means "if NONE of them
> are there").  I think this works better:
> 
> "If any tag listed as 'required' in Section 3.5 is missing from the
> DKIM-Signature header field, the verifier [...]."

+1

> "Omitted" might be better than "missing"; I'm not sure.

+1

	Tony Hansen
	tony at att.com