ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Collection of use cases for SSP requirements

2006-12-09 17:13:44
Dave Crocker wrote:
old news, but i'm trying to catch up.

Steve Atkins wrote:
While I strongly agree with this interpretation of dkim-base,
some have argued that there are three states
in dkim-base: signature verification suceeds, signature
verification fails and "no signature".

Since -base explicitly direct a failure as being equivalent to no signature, that leaves a total of 2 states:

1. GoodSig
2. NoSig

Unfortunately, it will probably not have that effect when it all said and done - "Cry Wolf Syndrome."

    FAILURE SIGNATURE  ==> NOSIG

has no logical basis for it.

In short, when systems begin to see an avalanche of DKIM failures, a pattern of NOSIGS will not be ignored.

---
HLS




_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>