[ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend)

[Jim Fenton]

Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
> Meant to include this, for completeness:
>
>
> Replacing 'reputation' with 'assessment', here's the latest version:
>
>   

I'm better with this version; thanks.  I do feel that we're effectively
using "assessment" as a proxy for "the R-word" which goes back to the
concern I voiced long ago about not requiring the verifier to pass on
other values including i= if they're present.  It seems to me that this
is effectively dictating the operation of the (wink wink, nudge nudge)
assessor.    But I won't belabor that, since it seems that the rough
consensus felt otherwise.

The important point now is responding to Cullen's concerns that the new
text doesn't clarify things adequately.

-Jim