[ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary

[Dave Crocker]

> I think I like this approach - keeping stuff off the critical path
> to the extent possible, but I'm a bit unclear as to where the
> suggested boundary is here. Maybe the answer to this questions will
> help me out:
> 
> Does #1 above include specification of *a* way for a mailing list
> to add its signature to an already signed message, s.t. there is a
> chance that both signatures can verify at the end-recipient's MTA.
> (I can imagine that there'll be variations on how to do this, but
> I assume that any such variations would be off the critical path.)


Suggested "process" heuristic for this sort of issue:

Generate two or three different multi-signature test scenarios and make sure we 
believe/know they can work.  Keep the debate about the selection of scenarios 
limited.  They merely have to look reasonable; they don't have to be comprehensive.

Defer all other work on multiple signatures.

d/
-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>