Hector,
Hector Santos wrote:
The Protocol MUST NOT be required to be invoked if a valid
first party signature (without the 's') is found.
...
The implemention can choose to look at the verification of first or decide
to do the SSP first. As long as the combined results produces the same
outcome, it should not matter how it is done.
Those are not in conflict. As I read it the requirement states that
an SSP lookup MUST NOT be REQUIRED (== is OPTIONAL) when a valid
first party signature is present.
I guess rephrasing it as follows might make you happier:
The Protocol MAY be invoked when a valid first party signature
is present.
[INFORMATIVE NOTE: The expectation is that most implementations
will not (always) invoke the protocol in this case.]
IMO those are equivalent, so I don't mind which gets used. Maybe
others prefer one over the other or don't agree about equivalence?
Stephen.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html