At 02:31 PM 10/5/2004 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
In the small we are talking about a signature that is valid
from an initiator to a responder, and then discarded by the
responder. It creates a new signature as an initiator for
the next responder.
i think that accurately represents the current proposals.
does anyone disagree?
Depends on what you mean by an initiator and responder. Are we talking about
MTA hop by MTA hop here? If so, I disagree. I feel that a signature from the
original sender (From address) is a stronger and more desirable statement than
an intermediary, so I would keep that signature around in case it still works.
Intermediaries that modify the message should re-sign, and perhaps delete any
existing intermediary signature.
So I guess I'm thinking somewhere between "small" and "large".
-Jim