On Dec 10, 2007 10:26 AM, Charles Lindsey
<chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:00:36 -0000, Dave Crocker
<dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
To the extent that the above is not sufficiently clear:
The SSP specification needs to be modified to remove all directions
for recipient actions, instead limiting itself to statements about the
actions of a potential signer.
-1
The specification needs to allow the signer to say what he would *like*
the verifier to do.
CharlesH.Lindsey---------AtHome,doingmyownthing------------------------
+1 on the -1
I believe that this is an important part of SSP. It gives it sharp
teeth if the implementer so chooses. Something that has always been
lacking and sorely needed on the other specifications that many in
this group, including myself, have hashed out.
Regards,
Damon Sauer
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html