[ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=

[Paul Hoffman]

At 2:37 PM -0400 4/19/06, Hector Santos wrote:
>  >        Verifiers SHOULD support checking of x= values.
>
>I think this must be a MUST.  In my view, this is risking malpractice and
>product liability problems if a domain has exclusively expressed an
>expiration and it is not honored by the verifier.

Armchair lawyering should be out of scope for this discussion. 
Everyone should, of course, implement from the spec in any way they 
want to with respect to their perceptions of the law. But that's an 
implementation choice, not a spec choice.

>   If there are any harm or
>damages some some entity (user or domain), this is subject for action
>(asking for trouble.)

Similarly, threats of legal action, even by third parties, should 
also be out of scope.

>I don't think I am off base with this opinion,

I do, given the long list of IETF specifications that allow the 
recipient to decide what they do or don't want to do based on local 
policy, and the amazing lack of "malpractice and product liability 
problems" that have come up.