It may be better to have "Assessor" or "DKIM Assessor" unless you
want to constraint the module to consume the SSID only or identities
only.
The whole point of defining this term is to isolate the assessment of
the identity from other decisions. I think it's best as it is, with
"Identity Assessor".
If you want to deliver non-DKIM values, then it does not sound right
to have DKIM in the name.
All the more reason to keep "DKIM" out of the assessor's name. The
inclusion of "and non-DKIM" is important to make it clear that this
isn't restricting what implementations can use -- only specifying what
the DKIM spec officially provides. This was an important point of
contention, and the text that Dave posted is carefully balanced.
I much prefer Dave's proposed text to SM's.
Barry
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html