On Tuesday 01 August 2006 02:10, Douglas Otis wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 23:25 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Monday 31 July 2006 21:22, John Levine wrote:
> > >> I think this is the key issue then and we ought to focus on it.  In
> > >> my view almost the entire point of a signing policy is constraining
> > >> whose signatures are considered authorized by the domain owner.
> > >
> > > I'm assuming that when you say authorized, you mean authoritative.
> > > (English definitely has its shortcomings.)
> >
> > I meant authorized, as I think the SSP concept is about authorization.
> > I can see where authoritative fits better as I wrote it.  I'm not sure
> > there is a distinction between the two worth arguing about.
>
> The last time policy was reviewed before starting to the base draft, the
> conclusion was that policy is not an authorization function, rather
> policy indicates what the identity uses or does.  With that in mind,
> John's terminology of "authoritative" better reflects that view.
>
> Assume that the 2822.From domain indicates both the use of designated
> domains and non-designated domains.  Assume also that by definition
> designated domains MUST employ DKIM, but that non-designated domains MAY
> employ DKIM.  A designated domain might also be defined as being
> "authoritative" when it comes to concerns related whether the message is
> being replayed or whether the identity header is valid.  The same policy
> may also indicate use of non-designated domains that are defined as "not
> authoritative."
>
> Your Authorization terminology is easily confused with what might be
> implied by "authoritative."  For either the designated or non-designated
> domains, their indicated use might imply an "authorization of use" when
> viewing policy as an authorization function.  It seems better to avoid
> referring to policy as "authorization" to keep the terminology
> consistent and what is being indicated clear.
>

I don't recall that conclusion, but I'll stick with what I said the first 
time:

> > I meant authorized, as I think the SSP concept is about authorization.
> > I can see where authoritative fits better as I wrote it.  I'm not sure
> > there is a distinction between the two worth arguing about.

I'm leaving on vacationthis afternoon, so I'll leave you and the rest of the 
WG to figure it out while I'm gone.

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

Reply via email to