ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2007-12-13 06:51:06


Jim Fenton wrote:
Mark Delany wrote:
On Dec 12, 2007, at 10:36 PM, Jim Fenton wrote:
Is there a common subset of SSP that most everyone agrees on?
I thought we had documented it in RFC 5016.
From an IETF procedural perspective that may well be so - my question
is more about whether the sentiment of the WG matches 5016?
...
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.

Jim,

I think you did not try to answer Mark's question. He didn't ask about the range of individual opinions, which is the answer you gave. He asked about a common subset that "most everyone agrees on". That permits leaving out stray, outlier views. (And by the way, I don't recall seeing a recent posting hostile to DKIM deployment.)

In other words, Jim, he asked a classic rough consensus question.

In fact my own reading of postings does show a rather solid common subset, quite strongly. Just look for references to phrases like "not controversial".

d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html