To get past the contentions around SSP, I'm wondering if we should
change the wording slightly, as follows.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
Barry Leiba wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT IETF WORKING GROUP CHARTER
8 Nov 2005
Domain Keys Identified Message (DKIM)
DESCRIPTION OF WORKING GROUP:
The Internet mail protocols and infrastructure allow mail sent from
one domain to purport to be from another. While there are sometimes
legitimate reasons for doing this, it has become a source of general
confusion, as well as a mechanism for fraud and for distribution of
spam (when done illegitimately, it's called "spoofing"). The DKIM
working group will produce standards-track specifications that allow
a domain to take responsibility, using digital signatures, for having
taken part in the transmission of an email message and to publish
possibly to publish
"policy" information about how it applies those signatures. Taken
together, these will assist receiving domains in detecting (or ruling
out) certain forms of spoofing as it pertains to the signing domain.
...
The deliverables for the DKIM working group are these:
* An informational RFC providing an overview of DKIM and how it can fit
into overall messaging systems, implementation and migration
considerations, and outlining potential DKIM applications and future
extensions.
* An informational RFC presenting a detailed threat analysis of, and
security requirements for, DKIM. IESG approval of this document is a
prerequisite for the submission of the standards-track specifications.
* A standards-track specification for DKIM signature and verification.
* A standards-track specification for DKIM policy handling.
A possible ...
* A standards-track specification for a DKIM DNS Resource Record.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org