ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: ISSUE 1521 -- Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages

2008-01-25 06:29:46
On Jan 24, 2008, at 6:14 PM, Hector Santos wrote:

Mark Delany wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Summary of proposal:

All text that causes SSP to be applied to an already-signed message
needs to be removed.

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.
+1
If for no other reason than the obvious fact that SSP is not making progress as it stands. We need some sort of reset if we hope to proceed.

Its unfortunate that it has nothing to do with technical reasons but the powers that are pushing reputations instead. The fact is, Dave's never cared for SSP

It's the IETF, everyone has a say regardless of whether they are qualified. You, me, Dave, everyone here.

But to disagree with you, I voted +1 precisely for technical reasons. I want a simple solution that non-WG-specialists can grok. I don't think we have that today.


Mark.

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

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