Who do you feel we need to hear from at this stage to gauge interest?
-- Brett
On Apr 27, 2010, at 2:32 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 4/27/2010 11:08 AM, McDowell, Brett wrote:
On Apr 27, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 4/27/2010 10:40 AM, McDowell, Brett wrote:
That's how I see it. The key is that Y *validates* the DKIM signature
and processes the sender's ADSP
Where is this going to be supported? That is, how widespread does anyone
believe that support for this scenario will be? Why?
I'm not sure if you were asking this as a rhetorical question in an attempt
to imply that such adoption would be low, or if you actually expected some of
us who may have non-public knowledge of such plans to disclose them to this
public mail list, or if you were soliciting speculation. In any event, I can
only speculate.
I meant the question quite seriously.
When trying to specify anything, it's important to be clear about who is the
target for adopting it and how motivated they will be and how feasible
adoption
will be within a useful timeframe.
If the specification is only intended for Yahoo and Google and there are good
signs they will adopt it, then fine.
If the goal is broader adoption, then Yahoo and Google can actually be
misleading examples, since they are not representative of the wider mailing
list
management software or operations community.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html