All,
At the meeting last week we said we wanted to try get issue
1399 [1] resolved before Jim sends out a version of SSP to
start WGLC.
So, if we can try focus on this for a day or two that'd be
good. If necessary we can do a straw poll towards the end
of the week to get Jim some input for the next rev of the doc.
(Since the time is short, I reckon its ok for folks to
revisit this week's outcome for this issue during WGLC if
we don't get a fairly clear consensus.)
Text from the tracker:
"One of the things I noticed from recent discussions is that we need
to have clarity in SSP on what, exactly, qualifies as a valid
signature for "I sign everything". This guidance is not in dkim-base
(purposefully), but I believe that we had intended i= to provide
that clarity. In any case, we do need to provide the exact semantics
in SSP of how a receiver determines whether a DKIM signature
satisfies the SSP criteria or not.
I'm not sure whether this rises to a -ssp-req item or not -- I
sort of lean toward it just to make certain that it is tracked. Or
if there's a bunch of disagreement about what satisfies the SSP
criteria, then it most likely should be..."
Regards,
S.
PS: Please try to keep on topic in this thread at least. We can
(and I'm sure will) revisit all the usual SSP talking points during
WGLC.
[1] https://rt.psg.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=1399
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html