Most of the sections under 3.2, "Operational Goals", are really goals in
the sense of "I want a mechanism that...". So "I want a mechanism that
permits incremental adoption for incremental benefit" makes complete
sense. As does "I want a mechanism that minimizes the amount of
required infrastructure."
But section 3.2.1, "Treat verification failure the same as no signature
present" doesn't strike me as a goal, but rather a consequence of the
way that the mechanism works. I would probably rather have something
that can treat verification failure more harshly, but it doesn't work
that way. This really ought to be merged with section 5.4, "Unverified
or unsigned mail" instead.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html