This is a summary of the discussion about draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-00 [1]:
4 May 2011 - John Klensin posted the proposed text that was
incorporated in draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-00
5 May 2011 - Jeff Macdonald asked whether there should be there be
advice mentioning that such changes should be done before (or after?)
such things as digital signing?
5 May 2011 - John Levine prefers noting that if a message is signed,
the MSA should consider what effect downcoding will have on the validity of the
signature, but not offer any advice about when to do what.
5 May 2011 - Jeff Macdonald stated that he could live with that advice.
5 May 2011 - Barry Leiba is happy with John Levine's response to
Jeff's concern.
5 May 2011 - John Levine proposed the following change:
"On page 11, just before section 8.1:
If a incoming message includes a DKIM or other signature, sites SHOULD
consider what effect message modifications will have on the validity
of the signature, and MAY use the presence or absence of a signature
as a criterion when deciding what, if any, modifications to make."
6 May 2011 - John Klensin posted a list of known issues [2].
There is the following change in Section 8:
"If an incoming message includes a DKIM [RFC4871][RFC5672], PGP
[RFC4880], S/MIME [RFC5751], or other signature, sites SHOULD
consider what effect message modifications will have on the validity
of the signature, and MAY use the presence or absence of a signature
as a criterion when deciding what, if any, modifications to make."
I'll send a note to Tony Hansen about it and see whether the WG Last
Call can be started.
If I missed anything or misinterpreted your comments, please send a
message to the YAM mailing list or the co-chairs.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
YAM co-chair
1. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-00
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/current/msg00593.html
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
