Re: [yam] AD DISCUSS about Section 8 of draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02 - Message Modifications

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

S Moonesamy wrote:

> At 16:53 22-08-2011, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>> This is a pretty classic case of avoiding a problematic Discuss, 
>> through an easy expedient.
>
> If YAM WG participants view it as such a case, they can voice their 
> concern.
>
> At 16:52 22-08-2011, Ned Freed wrote:
>
>> See above - I think pointing out the possibility of client signatures is
>> important and the text should be retained, but without the compliance 
>> language. I think deleting it weakens the document and therefore I 
>> object to its total
>> removal. That said, I can live with it going if not removing it will 
>> prevent
>> the move to full standard.
>
> Ok.
>
> Dave suggested the following text:
>
>    "Message modification can affect the validity of an existing message
>     signature, such as by DKIM [DKIM], PGP [RFC4880], and can render the
>     signature invalid.  This, in turn, can affect message handling by 
> later
>     receivers, such as filtering engines that consider the presence or 
> absence
>     of a signature"
>
> As an individual comment, the "that consider ..." could be dropped as 
> the text mentions that validity can affect message handling.
>
> Dave and Ned are in favor of including some text and Pete is for 
> removal.  I would appreciate some more feedback.

I am against removing the text, as it will be a disservice to the 
community. I am Ok with weakening it and possibly adding examples. 
Dave's suggestion looks good to me.