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

[Jim Fenton]

Arvel Hathcock wrote:
>>> I would take this further: remove all text that says when to apply
>>> SSP.  Instead, provide text that states the contribution that SSP
>>> can make under different conditions:  mail with valid first-party
>>> signature, mail with valid third-party signature, and mail without
>>> valid signature.
>>>   
>>
>> I mostly agree with Wietse's proposal.  Yes, I'm aware that diverges 
>> sharply from the current draft.
>
> I could get behind Wietse's proposal also if it hadn't started with "I 
> would take this further."  I'm concerned with the "this" he refers to 
> which encourages avoiding SSP completely in the presence of a 
> verifiable signature from just anybody whom-so-ever.  I view that 
> notion as completely defeating SSP.

That's exactly what I was hoping wasn't being proposed.

-Jim