On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Douglas Otis <doug.mtv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Procedurally speaking, what path do you anticipate your draft following? > > > To require messages with invalidly repeated header fields to not return a > "pass" for DKIM signature validation. > > That's a technical response. What I asked was a procedural question.
