-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 2:22 PM
To: MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: ISSUE 1525 -- Restriction to
posting by firstAuthor breaks email semantics
MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
> "Seems so" is exactly the correct phrase..... because we
don't really
know - and currently can't generally know - whether the claim of
agency by the identity in the sender field is an authorized,
and thus
valid claim.....
Signed on behalf of Dave Crocker by Michael Hammer
Yup. Almost makes one wish that one knew the reputation of
Michael Hammer, doesn't it?
Are we sure that reputation is the issue? If we could look somewhere and
determine whether Dave Crocker allows anyone to act as his agent then we
can determine whether the claim of agency is valid without having to
worry about Michael Hammers reputation.
In fact, the reputation of Dave Crocker is probably irrelevant
for this situation...
And so too is the reputation of Michael Hammer. Why rely on reputation
when one can get a direct answer?
And, yes, one could start with Crocker's reputation and go
through some sort of formal delegation mechanism, but that's
more complicated and it ignores the potential for independent
action that this Hammer fellow retains. So no matter what
Crocker delegates, one is left needing to know something about Hammer.
d/
This Hammer fellow can do whatever he wants but that doesn't and
shouldn't involve Dave Crocker if Dave Crocker doesn't care to be
dragged into it. It has nothing to do with reputation. Your assertion is
almost like someone listening to the neighbor that says it's ok to go
pick Hammers apples despite Hammer having put up a no trespassing sign.
I haven't raised the formal delegation (positive) situation - I have
only raised the "I don't delegate agency to anyone" (negative)
situation. Not very complicated at all.
There may be value in including a formal delegation capability but that
is another discussion.
Mike
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html