[ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1521 -- Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages

[Dave Crocker]

Stephen Farrell wrote:
> The attached contains our view on the current list of SSP issues [1] except
> for those opened in the last week or so. (Sorry the formatting's a bit
> crappy.)
...
> Can you check that these seem ok, or comment where they don't?
...
> 1521	Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages	new	dkim	Nobody	0
> dhc at dcrocker.net	9 days ago		9 days ago	0

> Proposal: REJECT, but some wording changes may be needed for the next rev,
> thread is [4] I mainly saw opposition to the change suggested in the issue,
> and little support, but some text clarifying changes were suggested (e.g.
> [5]).
> [4] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2007q4/008424.html
> [5] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2007q4/008467.html


Your reading of the archive shows rather more complete and definitive 
discussion than mine.

Would you please explain the basis for assessing that this topic got 
sufficient discussion and that there was rough consensus on it?

This is perhaps the most fundamental issue on the list, so it would be 
advisable that we be quite careful about its consideration and resolution.

Thanks.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net