[ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change

[Michael Thomas]

Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:30:27 -0800 Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>>
>> Jim Fenton wrote:
>>> In the absence of a valid DKIM signature on behalf of the "From" address
>>> [RFC2822], the verifier of a message MUST determine whether messages 
> from a
>>> particular sender are expected to be signed, and what signatures are
>>> acceptable.
>> What's proving interesting is how completely the implication of this seems 
> to 
>> have been missed by quite a few participants.
>>
> I seem to have missed the discussion where anyone but you is suprised by 
> this.  If one is going to distinguish between originator signatures and 
> others, then this requirement pretty obviously follows.

+1, and I had the dubious distinction of having to go through the
thousands of mail messages. I can't imagine that there is anything
new under the sun on this topic.

		Mike