[ietf-dkim] Re: ISSUE: Better definition of "DKIM signing complete" required

[Hector Santos]

Michael Thomas wrote:
> Hector Santos wrote:
>> It depends on how mixed failure and success is interpreted.  DKIM-BASE
>> says as long as one signature is valid in a multi-signature message, the
>> message is valid.  Failures MUST be ignored as if it was never signed.
>>
>> There is something not very kosher with that. 
> 
> That's incorrect. DKIM says nothing about "messages" being valid or not.
> Only signatures.

Maybe you should quote "valid"

Look, what in earth are you validating a SIGNATURE for if its not 
directly proportional to the validity of the message?  Is it just for 
show?  I hope you are not suggesting that a signature validity is 
persistent while you can alter the structure and content of a message.

Lets not go there. OK?

Thanks

---
HLS