[ietf-dkim] Purpose and sequence for DKIM specification and deployment

[Dave Crocker]

>>Security Role:
>>      DKIM's basic mechanism performs simple message signing for any identity
>>wishing to be held accountable for the message.  The security function performed
>>by the signing is authentication of that asserted identity.
> 
> Your list does not offer the possibility of establishing opportunistic
> identity schemes that could based upon the selective binding of signed
> message identifiers retained locally.  

1. I am pretty sure that I have no idea what you are describing.

2. The description I wrote is intended to cover the existing DKIM specification 
and its intent.  As nearly as I can tell, you are suggesting some sort of 
funtionality that is both theorectical -- hence needing to establish community 
need and interest -- and outside the scope of the current effort (so far).


  >>      The SSP mechanism provides the security function of authorization, to
>>determine whether the sending of unsigned messages is authorized or prohibited.
> 
> 
> This can work in conjunction with a host name as was done with the HELO.

It can work in conjunction with lots of things.  Are you suggesting changes to 
the text I wrote?  To the specifications?  To the charter?


> There would be an inordinately high overhead associated with attempts to
> associate mail-box domain authorizations within third-party signed
> messages.

What is the "inordinately high overhead" you are referring to?


-- 
 
   d/

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  +1.408.246.8253
  dcrocker  a t ...
  WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net