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

["Hector Santos" <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Otis" <[e-mail]>
To: "Mark Delany" <[e-mail]>


> The default assumption of a listed domain in the policy would be to
> assume "I sign all".  This could even be called the "I sign all" list.
> The only embellishment needed would be the "Only". The default policy
> when none is found would be an empty list with the assumed "I sign all"
> assertion.
>

+1.

In terms of the DSAP draft syntax:

    OP=ALWAYS; 3P=NEVER;     # Only "I" sign mail

or

    OP=ALWAYS; 3P=ALWAYS;    # "I" sign mail
    3PL=;                    # defined, but empty list;


In terms of the SSP draft syntax:

   o=!  # All mail from the entity is signed; Third-Party signatures
        # SHOULD NOT be accepted

But the SSP I-D stills has the "semantics" argument of what is meant by
"Third-Party signatures SHOULD NOT be accepted."  I took this to mean 100%
exclusivity. Apparently that is not what it means.  Hence one of the reasons
for a "Fill in the holes" DSAP I-D proposal


--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com







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