Most of the sections under 3.2, "Operational Goals", are really goals in the sense of "I want a mechanism that...". So "I want a mechanism that permits incremental adoption for incremental benefit" makes complete sense. As does "I want a mechanism that minimizes the amount of required infrastructure."
But section 3.2.1, "Treat verification failure the same as no signature present" doesn't strike me as a goal, but rather a consequence of the way that the mechanism works. I would probably rather have something that can treat verification failure more harshly, but it doesn't work that way. This really ought to be merged with section 5.4, "Unverified or unsigned mail" instead. -Jim _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
