ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change

2007-12-13 02:11:47
It's purely a strawman, but I sense that sub-setting a core might help us move forward. I am likely wrong, but it's a question I'd like to ask.

My sense from reading the list traffic is that there are a lot of
differing opinions on what the subset might contain, with results
ranging from making SSP vaguely useful to actively hostile to DKIM
deployment.

So does that mean you are skeptical about the existence of a broadly acceptable subset of SSP or merely that there might be contention over what that subset is?

Given your participation level, I readily bow to your greater knowledge of WG sentiment, but it seems to me that if there is no acceptable subset, then you are in effect saying that the current SSP is the minimalist possible functional spec. Is that what you are saying? That the current SSP is indivisible?

In any event, I see Jon's suggestion as a divide-and-conquer approach. If it moves us forward, I'm for it because at this stage I suspect that progress is as important as substance.



Mark.

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