Tony Hansen wrote:
+1. This is our own holdup on moving forward with DKIM.
Speaking of ADSP, I am -1 on its continuation. I dont see any
significant receiver (ISP) adoption of ADSP, to be frank.
Given the state of flux for ADSP, there was no way that our ISP services
would even consider deploying it until after it was published. Now that
it's closer, our ISP services certainly have plans for deployment.
Thats good news Tony.
Question. Can you speak of which ISP services?
- the general usage of the ISP's public domain for users, or
- vendor/user communications.
For example, my home DSL account is with AT&T. From cingular days, I
still have a legacy email bellsouth.net user domain account. I am not
sure if AT&T issues att.net accounts to home tiers.
I think it will help to distinguish that there two basic forms of
possible ISP adoption:
1) DKIM w/o ADSP support general ISP user domain hosting,
e.g.; mail from the ISP "open ended" user domain bellsouth.net.
by open ended I mean, I can use it from anywhere and so can
others.
2) DKIM w/ ADSP support for private Vendor (ISP/ESP)/USER
communications. e.g.; ATT "Customer Care" emailing from
amcustomercare.att-mail.com
The latter (#2) is what I believe we need to leverage and make sure it
is the high benefit possible for DKIM w/ ADSP.
With #1, that has been the issue for the past 3-4 years wrt how SSP
will of work here. ADSP is a result of the lack of SSP consensus or
rather too complex to consider all the 3rd party issues.
In my view, we need to make very clear for adopters to get the good
grasp of the key difference in this regard - where/how POLICY will
play a role for ISP different type of communications or services.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html