Jim Fenton:
(1) It changes SSP from being a protocol that governs the error
condition of an optional protocol to being a protocol that governs
*every* email received by *every* MTA.
Application of SSP to only messages containing broken signatures has
*never* been proposed in any SSP draft. To do so would create an
incentive not to deploy DKIM: there would be the fear that
application of a DKIM signature might hinder delivery of messages,
because of the potential for breakage that would not exist for
unsigned messages.
An excellent reason to treat "no signature" as "bad signature"
and vice versa.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html