[ietf-dkim] What is your view on these three SSP topics?

[Stephen Farrell]

Siegel, Ellen wrote:
> You all seem very comfortable saying that for all or strict a signature that doesn't match one of the designated message headers is automatically non-compliant, and that the message itself is non-compliant if that signature is the only one on the message. 
> 
> There's a fair bit of mail out there that doesn't fit this scenario, i.e. which is signed by an entity other than those in the designated headers. 

If there are data available demonstrating this, that would be good to
see.

Stephen.