[ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft

[Dave Crocker]

Folks,


On reviewing the current SSP draft, I'm finding myself unclear about the scope 
of the document.

So I thought I'd ask a couple of very basic questions:



      1. Is the SSP specification intended (or allowed) to modify the 
semantics of the DKIM Base specification (RFC 4871)?

         I am hoping that folks do *not* intend to change the semantics of the 
base specification, since any change will disrupt adoption of the base.



      2. Does RFC 4871 contain any claims that a DKIM signature carries a 
claim by the signer that any of the body or header content is "correct" or 
"truthful"?

         I ask because I believe it does not carry any such claim and that, 
rather, a DKIM signature asserts a very generic degree of signer 
"responsibility" which does not extend to formal claims of correctness.



d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net