Re: [ietf-dkim] A more fundamental SSP axiom

[Damon <[e-mail]>]

> A financial institution being heavily phished may wish to explicitly
> state:
>
> "SIGN ALL MAIL" and "DO NOT USE ANY SERVICES KNOWN TO DAMAGE THEIR
> SIGNATURES"

We really really really mean it when we say "Sign all mail"

>
> Cisco may wish to only state:
>
> "SIGN ALL MAIL"
>

We _dont_ really really mean it.

So if the sig comes in munged, we will leave it up to the receiver to
decide what to do with it.
As a real live postmaster, thank you for giving me more work to do.
Because operationally, I would treat an email with a munged sig, the
same way I would a message without a sig or "Sign some mail". Possibly
even with more malice.
I really don't have all day to go through all the "special cases" so
the only ones that get my attention are the ones we really really
needed.
So operationally, it would be easier to just treat everyone as "Sign
sometimes" except for those that really really really mean it.

Regards,
Damon
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html