[ietf-dkim] How to reconcile passive vs active?

[Hector Santos]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell at cs.tcd.ie>


> Chair-ish quibble: I think the positions exposed on the list
> must of course be covered in reqs-00, but I also think the
> more words that are used to do that, the more disagreement we'll
> get. Put another way,  I hope no-one wants to see a reqs-00
> that has near as many words as have been posted to this list
> over the last couple of weeks.

+1,

I'll be happy with just a fascimile of the following block of words:

 - Protocol must offer support for the following domain
   policies:

    - no mail ever expected by domain
    - no signature expected whatsoever by domain
    - domain signature optional, no third party expected
    - domain signature optional, 3rd party allowed. See below.
    - domain signature required, 3rd party allowed. See below.
    - domain signature required, no 3rd party expected

 - Protocol must support optional "allow list" of domain allowed
   to sign.

Bonus Block of Words:

 - Protocol must offer optional "Highest Hashing Method
   Possible" understood by target end point.

Maybe MT can just cut and paste this small block of words in and I think
reached pareto's ratio! <g>

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com