[ietf-dkim] SSP is the Sender Signing Practices, not the Sender's accreditation

[John R Levine]

> Sender Signing Practices is designed to tell you about the sender's
> signing practices.  The sender isn't telling you about whether the
> they are good or bad.  They are not offering accreditation or vouching
> services for them.  They are telling you what they do and do not do.

I wanted to check that nobody was claiming that it did anything else.

> DKIM, with or without SSP, does not solve the phishing problem, nor
> the spam problem.  DKIM, in conjunction with one or more reputation
> systems, may help here, but this has little to do with SSP.

Right.  So we agree that we have yet to show any plausible reason that SSP
would be of use to receivers.

If the theory is that it's only useful with a reputation system, perhaps
we should be more explicit about how we anticipate those systems will work
and what functions they will serve.  You can probably guess what my
opinion is.

R's,
John