Ned Freed wrote:
Integrity protection is indeed a service, but it isn't the service DKIM
provides. The service DKIM provides is the ability to "assert
responsibility
for an email message in transit by means of a digital signature." This
is how
the threats document puts it and while it is not exactly how I'd put it (I
prefer the term "accountability" to "responsibility") I'm comfortable
with it.
What do others think of this characterisation of the service dkim is
providing? It'd be good if we did have an agreed term, and these
seem reasonable to me. (I'd also prefer the "accountability" option.)
If it is ok it ought be in the charter.
Stephen.
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org