Jeff Macdonald wrote:
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:31 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304)
<MHammer(_at_)ag(_dot_)com>
There was a (hard won) consensus that a signature by
the owner/admin of a domain carries more weight than the signature of a
3rd party because the owner/admin of the domain controls the domain and
the 3rd party doesn't.
I don't think there is a consensus on what a 3rd party signature is.
What's wrong with Michael Thomas work, RFC 5016 where it specifically
spells out the "Definitions and Requirements Language" for 1st and 3rd
party as it is to be defined and used for DKIM and POLICY?
IMV, I believe we need to separate the ideas of outsourcing, clearing
houses, service bureaus, etc, as they can be 3rd party, but also
passive meaning the message is visible as a 1st party, even though
they might been signed by someone else. This would be more of
business model function than a technical protocol function.
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html