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

[Jim Fenton]

Dave Crocker wrote:
> Summary of proposal:
>
>> All text that causes SSP to be applied to an already-signed message 
>> needs to be removed.

> I would like to ask folks with an opinion about this proposal to post 
> an explicit note stating support or opposition.  Some of the existing 
> posts were about substantive issues in the proposal, but did not 
> clearly indicate support or opposition.
>
> Given that this issue goes to the core of a significant fraction of 
> the current specification's functionality and given that there is at 
> least an implied requirement for the functionality in the SSP 
> requirements RFC, I'll ask folks to do both a +1/-1 *and* to explain 
> their reasons.
>

Before I answer this, I want to make sure that I'm clear on what the 
proposal is.

Please confirm that "already-signed message" means "message having a 
valid signature at the verifier".  In other words, please confirm that 
invalid signatures are not being considered here.

-Jim