Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1287: K... Otis, signature removal

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:26:30 -0400

Well I hate to insist that signers SHOULD do anything but doesn't the
issue of multiple signatures belong in a mail list addendum rather than
base? If I am forwarding should I want to forward an unverifiable
signature over my verifiable one, how would that impact my reputation? 

Bill Oxley 
Messaging Engineer 
Cox Communications, Inc. 
Alpharetta GA 
404-847-6397 
[email-masked] 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 3:18 PM
To: IETF-DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1287: K... Otis, signature removal

>> Wait a minute, hasn't this been discussed ad nauseum with the clear
>> consensus to leave this text in?
> 
>  Signers SHOULD NOT remove any DKIM-Signature header fields from
>  messages they are signing, even if they know that the signatures
>  cannot be verified.

Well, it's easy to sort out whether we've had sufficient discussion:
Does anyone support Doug's request to remove this text?  If you do, 
please respond here by Thursday's jabber chat.

Barry

--
Barry Leiba, Internet Messaging Technology  ([email-masked])
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba
http://www.research.ibm.com/spam
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

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

---

From: "william(at)elan.net" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:35:59 -0700 (PDT)

> signature over my verifiable one, how would that impact my reputation?

Is it your signature? If not why should it?

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[email-masked]