John Levine wrote:
Just so I'm sure I understand you, you're claiming that DNS managers
are without exception so hostile and/or incompetent that they can not
set up ADSP records for the A records they manage. That's not "would
prefer not to", it's "can not". As JD pointed out a few weeks ago,
anyone using DKIM is going to need to manage new DNS records anyway,
so if your DNS managers refuse to install anything, you're screwed no
matter what ADSP says.
It isn't productive to dismiss DNS administrators who are resistant to
adding many ADSP records as "lazy", "hostile", and/or "incompetent". It
makes it sound like they aren't worthy of using ADSP. But they are, as
far as this protocol is concerned, our customers.
The requirement to publish large numbers of ADSP records is a barrier to
its widespread adoption, at least its adoption in a way that provides
broad coverage for domains. This can be addressed with tools, but the
requirement to add tooling to achieve good ADSP coverage is also a
deployment barrier. Similar concerns led the WG to the use of TXT
records rather than a new RR. There are a lot of DNS management tools
out there that would need to change in order to publish the necessary
ADSP records, and this would take considerable time.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html