[ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :

[EKR]

Hector Santos <hsantos at santronics.com> writes:

> In my view, it doesn't matter if its A, B, AB, XYZ or weaker or
> stronger.   It is about expectations.
>
> if S says I only sign with A, then R should not see signatures with B,
> X or Y.

OK, but we're discussing what sorts of policies S should be able to
communicate. In particular, should S be able to say "I sign with
both A and B and any signature you see from me will have both,
not just either."


> Seeing failure as unsigned just doesn't cut it for me simply because
> there will be MORE failures then success and we will need a way to
> deal with that.

It seems to me that you're denying a basic premise of the system.
>From base S 4.2:

   Verifiers SHOULD ignore failed signatures as though they were not
   present in the message.  Verifiers SHOULD continue to check
   signatures until a signature successfully verifies to the
   satisfaction of the verifier.  To limit potential denial-of-service
   attacks, verifiers MAY limit the total number of signatures they will
   attempt to verify.

-Ekr