Dave Crocker wrote:
Eliot Lear wrote:
Jot,
The overview isn't keeping DKIM from the world. In fact you guys can
sign today, if you don't already (haven't checked).
Eliot, you are, of course, correct. But that rather misses the point.
The point is what will facilitate adoption. (Why is it that the IETF
works so hard to ignore adoption issues, as we think merely publishing a
document is the end of the task?)
The Overview document, approximately in its current form (IMO), can be
extremely helpful for the rest of the community, to understand DKIM and
make deployment and use decisions about it.
Who, exactly, is this "rest of the community"? I'd say that there
are at least two distinct communities:
1) software/hardware vendors as well as open source implementations
writing DKIM
2) IT folks deploying (1)
From what I can tell, (1) seems to be doing pretty OK with what we've
given them. Google's recent introduction of dkim signing seems to have
only required -base (actually -allman-01) to get them going. And google
isn't the only one who's digested the spec and popped out an
implementation.
As for (2), I suspect they are going to be taking their cues from (1).
Arvel's user base is a great testament of how (2) needs software that
makes doing the right thing easy. I don't think they need any deep
understanding of the motivations and mechanics -- and for Arvel's
customers an awareness that the IETF even exists :)
So I'm sort of dubious -- at this stage -- that either of these is
the *necessary* audience. Or is there some other necessary audience?
I can see this later as I've already written, but not now.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html