[mail-vet-discuss] Auth-Results issues? #2 headerspec
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at sendmail.com
Wed Apr 19 15:09:20 PDT 2006
Tony Hansen wrote:
> 3) Make the headerspec property an optional value to be specified by the
> registration specifics for a given authentication method. So whatever
> document is used to define how A-R is used by dkim would also specify
> what value should go here. Not all authentication methods will need a
> property.
It may be necessary to provide other data as well. I'm thinking maybe stuff
like this might also be meaningful to an MUA:
version (version of the method being evaluated)
sig-id (signature ID; see my other chatter on ietf-dkim)
So perhaps the ABNF should have method=result, ptype-stuff=value (which you have
now), and also allowances for other auxilliary data.
More information about the mail-vet-discuss
mailing list