[ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures

[Barry Leiba]

> I think it depends on your "Verifier" the guys who have to make the decision
> with all the junk coming into the system how it will view it.
...
> Are we suppose to turn a blind eye to the quality of the message and just
> look at who is responsible?  If so, then who cares what the message quality
> is as long as it comes from a "good person."

We have to be clear about what DKIM is and isn't.

DKIM is something that lets a sender say "my domain sent this message".
DKIM is something that lets a verifier confirm that, and use it as part 
of its decision of what to do with the message.

DKIM is NOT something that says ANYthing about the trustworthiness of 
the signer, or of the "quality" of the message.

Any decisions about the quality of the message or the goodness of the 
source are made by the verifier, POSSIBLY using the information provided 
by DKIM as input, but not directly resulting from DKIM.

<chair>
In particular, any attempt to include that sort of information in DKIM 
is explicitly out of scope for this working group.
</chair>

Barry

--
Barry Leiba, Pervasive Computing Technology  (leiba at watson.ibm.com)
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam