[mail-vet-discuss] Re: Auth-Results issues? #7 section 4.1
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at sendmail.com
Thu Apr 27 12:31:49 PDT 2006
Getting back to this again...
Tony Hansen wrote:
> In section 4.1, it says:
> Naturally then, users would not activate such a
> feature unless they are certain the header will be added by the
> receiving MTA that accepts the mail which is ultimately read by the
> MUA, and instances of the header added by foreign MTAs will be
> removed before delivery.
> Where does it say that foreign A-Rs are to be removed? I don't see that
> anywhere in the spec.
I didn't want to mandate such a thing, again for reasons along the lines of
speed of adoption. Do you think that should be mandatory?
> Later in section 4.1, it says:
> An MTA adding a header MUST add the header at the top of the message
> so that there is generally some indication upon delivery of where in
> the chain of handling MTAs the sender authentcation was done.
> This actually places the A-R in the same category as a trace header, as
> defined in [MAIL]. This should be mentioned.
If I get my way on ietf-dkim, there will be a way to specifically associate
certain results with specific signatures. In that case I don't care where the
A-R header goes, and this doesn't need to be labeled as a trace header.
More information about the mail-vet-discuss