Arvel Hathcock wrote:
I would take this further: remove all text that says when to apply
SSP. Instead, provide text that states the contribution that SSP
can make under different conditions: mail with valid first-party
signature, mail with valid third-party signature, and mail without
valid signature.
I mostly agree with Wietse's proposal. Yes, I'm aware that diverges
sharply from the current draft.
I could get behind Wietse's proposal also if it hadn't started with "I
would take this further." I'm concerned with the "this" he refers to
which encourages avoiding SSP completely in the presence of a
verifiable signature from just anybody whom-so-ever. I view that
notion as completely defeating SSP.
That's exactly what I was hoping wasn't being proposed.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html