--- 1/draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-04.txt	2010-11-09 22:16:32.000000000 +0100
+++ 2/draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-05.txt	2010-11-09 22:16:32.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,18 +1,18 @@
 
 DKIM Working Group                                          M. Kucherawy
 Internet-Draft                                                 Cloudmark
-Intended status: Informational                          November 7, 2010
-Expires: May 11, 2011
+Intended status: Informational                          November 9, 2010
+Expires: May 13, 2011
 
                      RFC4871 Implementation Report
-                draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-04
+                draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-05
 
 Abstract
 
    This document contains an implementation report for the IESG covering
    DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) in support of the advancement of
    that specification along the Standards Track.
 
 Status of this Memo
 
    This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
@@ -21,21 +21,21 @@
    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
    Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
 
    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
 
-   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 11, 2011.
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 13, 2011.
 
 Copyright Notice
 
    Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
    document authors.  All rights reserved.
 
    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
    (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
@@ -246,20 +246,26 @@
    Keys with Specific Granularity:  14 keys were retrieved that had
       specific names in their "g=" tags.
 
    Keys with Syntax Errors:  Less than 0.1% of keys retrieved from the
       DNS had syntax errors.
 
    DomainKeys Compatibility:  1.2% of the retrieved keys appeared to be
       intended for use with the older DomainKeys proposal rather than
       DKIM
 
+   AUID use:  52.4% of signatures did not contain an explicit AUID ("i="
+      value).  Of those that did, 86.6% used a domain matching the SDID
+      ("d=" value).  Across all "i=" tags present, 42.8% provided no
+      local-part, 53.4% included a local-part matching the one found in
+      the From: field, and the remainder had a different local-part.
+
    Missing Keys:  1.7% of signatures received referenced keys that were
       not found in the DNS
 
    Optional Signature Tags:  Of the optional signature tags supported by
       the base specification, "t=" was seen 46.6% of the time (1% of
       which included timestamps in the future, even after forgiving some
       clock drift); "x=" was seen 4.2% of the time; "l=" was seen 4% of
       the time; "z=" was seen 7.2% of the time.
 
    Body Length Limits:  Of the signatures for which "l=" was used, 8.4%