[ietf-dkim] draft Errata on RFC 4871

[Michael Adkins]

>> There isn't. We host mail for numerous domains, but we're planning to
>> sign all of it as d=assessment.aol.com for the reasons Suresh mentioned
>> (same use policies, filtering, etc.). Plus, a single user identity in my
>> system can have multiple email addresses associated with it, so it makes
>> more sense (in my mind at least) to set i=user_id at assessment.example.com
>> instead of i=email_alias at assessment.example.com. For example, a single
>> dial-up customer can have up to seven mailboxes at a time but there's
>> still only one responsible identity for the account. I believe broadband
>> access providers have similar setups.
>>     
>
> This looks just fine to me. By using the user_id, you're satisfying the
> semantics of
>
> 	Identity of the user or agent (e.g., a mailing list manager) on
> 	behalf of which this message is signed
>
> and still maintains the uniqueness of that identity.
>
> I don't think this is the same as what Suresh was describing, though. He
> was talking about using assessment labels for the i= value, such as
> good at assessment.aol.com, rather than a value directly linked to the
> known user/agent.
>
> 	Tony Hansen
> 	tony at att.com
>   

And in all fairness to Suresh, I probably did initially describe the 
idea to him as using i= for the assessment at some meeting in the last 
year or so, but have since changed my mind on the implementation details.