[ietf-dkim] draft Errata on RFC 4871
ops.lists at gmail.com
Mon Jan 26 08:04:49 PST 2009
bah. rephrased .. i need to go produce an errata document for this
email - i drafted it in two or three stages and this slipped through
my proof reading.
" There are of course substantial difference in opinion on their
actual real life use cases"
"What reputation model can reasonably be layered on top of this
authentication, either singly or in various combinations of d= and i=,
some of which may only be completely realized in more fine grained
filtering systems, and to a possibly lesser extent or not at all in
larger and more high volume receiver mail systems, which may choose to
concentrate either solely on d= or i=."
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> Speaking entirely for myself, I always thought d= and i= are quite
> clear concepts by themselves, on what they denote and what they
> authenticate. There is, of course, substantial difference in opinion
> exist on their actual real life use cases, and on what reputation
> model can reasonably be layered on top of this authentication (or
> combinations of d= and i= some of which may be possible in more based
> on these.
More information about the ietf-dkim