[ietf-dkim] Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= tag/value)
dhc at dcrocker.net
Sat Apr 2 11:32:21 PDT 2011
On 4/1/2011 11:04 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> My recollection was that we decided DKIM has to produce at least one specific
> output, and that the spec needed to identify what that one particular item
> was. We never precluded it from making other information available.
Just to be very clear about the actual terms of the specification:
From RFC 5672
> This Update defines the output of that library to include the yes/no
> result of the verification and the "d=" value. In other words, it
> says what (one) identifier was formally specified for use by the
> signer and whether the use of that identifier has been validated.
> For a particular library, other information can be provided at the
> discretion of the library developer, since developers of assessors --
> these are the consumers of the DKIM library -- well might want more
> information than the standardized two pieces of information.
> However, that standardized set is the minimum that is required to be
> provided to a consuming module, in order to be able to claim that the
> library is DKIM compliant.
The language "at least one" does not quite match the actual semantics, since it
means that the "output" of DKIM can be variable.
The distinction that needs to be made is between formally-specified output vs.
implementation-specific access to DKIM internals.
More information about the ietf-dkim