> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:ietf-dkim- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 11:23 AM > To: DKIM WG > Subject: [ietf-dkim] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kucherawy-dkim-atps-00 > > The proposal Dave and I did, "Affiliated Names List"*, was a way for a > domain owner to publish affiliations with other DKIM domains. My > motivation for that proposal was driven by the belief** that 3rd party > signatures, which I will now call Non-Author DKIM Signatures, would be > treated differently than 1st party signatures.
That remains an unknown. I still haven't figured out what policy should be exposed to verifiers when ATPS hits but ADSP doesn't. > If there is a consensus that Non-Author DKIM Signatures should be > scored negatively***, then I suggest the scope of this document could > be expanded by simply removing the requirement that there be an ADSP > tag present. This would allow domain owners who are not participating > in ADSP to use the same infrastructure that this draft puts in place. Sure, it's possible consensus will go in the direction of supplanting ADSP with this. It certainly could (and I actually hadn't even thought of that until now). If that's the case it won't be hard to detach it from ADSP altogether. > PS - I apologize if this draft isn't within our charter. I suggest we discuss it on [email protected]. It's active on [email protected], but I think that's also the wrong place for it as it's not an operational concern (yet). -MSK _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
