[ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Reputation is out of scope or Define it

[Eliot Lear]

Hector,
> NEW ISSUE:  Reputation is out of scope or define it.

As a point of information, "reputation" is mentioned precisely once in
the SSP specification, and that is to say that it is out of scope.
>
[...]
>
> Unless it is clearly defined what is meant by reputation and how it is
> related, I suggest that we remove all reputation considerations from
> SSP discussions or drafts and reinforce that it is out of scope.

See above.  Also, I think I don't see anything unreasonable about people
attempting to place SSP within a broader context on a mailing list, so
long as the work doesn't normatively depend on it.

>
> I don't believe SSP, nor DKIM-BASE nor any other technology XYZ will
> alter or replace local policy decisions.  However as part of the local
> policy decision process, I believe the SSP design goal was such that
> DKIM and SSP will be part of the total decision making process and to
> help protect against certain high potential exploitations of DKIM
> signers.

On this I agree but I don't understand its relevance to the issue at hand.

Eliot