[ietf-dkim] errata revision: Assessor

[Eliot Lear]

On 3/25/09 10:28 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>
> Eliot Lear wrote:
>>> 8.  RFC4871 Section 2.11 Identity Assessor
> ...
>>>       New:
>>>         The name of the module that consumes DKIM's mandatory 
>>> payload, the
>>>         responsible Signing Domain Identifier (SDID).  Other DKIM 
>>> values
>>>         can also be delivered this module; however this additional 
>>> activity
>>>         is outside the scope of the DKIM signature specification.
>>>
>>
>> Replace "Other DKIM values" to "Other information".
>>
>> My logic: what the assessor consumes beyond the SDID is outside the 
>> scope of the spec.
>
>
> Is your concern that the presence of the DKIM qualifier could be taken 
> to /exclude/ other values?

Yes.
>
>
> The reason for saying DKIM, here, was to make sure the reader knows 
> it's ok for other DKIM-Sig values to be delivered.  Without the DKIM 
> reference, the sentence would seem to be so broad as to have truly 
> nothing to do with DKIM.

My concern is this: what do identity assessors use today?  An IP 
address.  They might want that tidbid of information as well.  How, 
then, not to exclude it?

Eliot