Barry Leiba 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?
Indeed; I agree. But, as I've said before, I think this is relevant
for advancement from DS to (full) Standard, and not so much from PS to
Right. The rules for Draft require that we demonstrate interoperability by at
least two, independent implementations. That's all.
We need to be careful that we not invent our own standards process, no matter
how much better we might think it.
As you note, efficacy (or more likely 'popularity') is the real key to Full
Standard, but it's not relevant to Draft Standard.
If this working group does continue, I'd suggest that updates to the
service overview (RFC 5585) and deployment/operations document also be
on the table. Those are the most appropriate places for the results of
operational experience to be described.
Agreed. Unless there's objection to this, I'll add a work item about
ongoing review and appropriate updating of those informational
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to