Subject: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:30:02 -0700

Hi,

In the following case, a message has a valid DKIM signature:

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=example.com; 
i=@test.example.com ...

The author is [email-masked] where the domain fails step 2 of 
Section 4.2.2.

As the message has a valid signature from the Author Domain (Section 
3.1), is Section 4.2.2 applicable?

Regards,
-sm

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

---

From: Douglas Otis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:27:18 -0700

> 3.1), is Section 4.2.2 applicable?

Do you think there should be a statement indicating the ADSP lookup  
procedure should not be done when there is a valid Author Domain  
signature?  Perhaps the receiving domain only validates DKIM  
signatures when ADSP indicates Discardable. : )

-Doug

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:41:38 -0700

>signatures when ADSP indicates Discardable. : )

My question is about the implementation of ssp-03.  The example which 
was tested is an odd case as we have a dkim=pass and 
dkim-asp=fail.  Section 3.1 of the draft says:

     If a message has a Valid Signature from an Author Domain, ASP
     provides no benefit relative to that domain since the message is
     already known to be compliant with any possible ASP for that
     domain.

I read that as meaning that as the ASP (ADSP) lookup is not done 
then.  I'm not saying that it should not be done. :-)

Regards,
-sm

---

From: [email-masked] (Wietse Venema)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:04:13 -0400 (EDT)

> then.  I'm not saying that it should not be done. :-)

I wrote the predecessor of that text. The reader has to understand
that ADSP targets email without valid author domain signature. If
a message has a valid author domain signature, then the signature
speaks for itself, and ADSP is not needed.

	Wietse

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:11:21 -0400

In the particular case you are stating, you have clearly identified
where the mail was signed, no other assertion can or should be made
about the signature. The dkim-asp=fail only indicates that you may not
want to bypass your other anti-spam mechaninations

Bill Oxley
Messaging Engineer
Cox Communications
404-847-6397

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of SM
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:42 PM
To: Douglas Otis
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage

Regards,
-sm