On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:54:52 -0700 Dave CROCKER <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
wrote:
Jim Fenton wrote:
It's fairly easy to demonstrate interoperability of protocols, but
usefulness is much more difficult. DKIM is an infrastructure protocol,
designed to provide a basis for other mechanisms, such as domain-based
reputation, to operate. Those other mechanisms are as yet nascent; how
does one judge usefulness at this point?
Jim,
This appears to be imposing criteria that go considerably beyond the
IETF's
requirements for Draft.
From the standpoing of IESG process, how is this legitimate?
So is it your position that a protocol must be advanced if it meets a
minimal set of criteria even in the face of engineering judgement that the
protocol is not yet sufficiently deployed to have a reliable understanding
of the adequacy of the current design?
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html