-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of J.D. Falk
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:25 PM
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ADSP stats
On Apr 20, 2011, at 4:36, <Bill(_dot_)Oxley(_at_)cox(_dot_)com> wrote:
Indeed lack of support for 3rd party signers was where I gave up any
interest at all in adsp
As I remember it, there was (or appeared to be) consensus to get ADSP
out there for testing by the entities it might work for, AND
simultaneously work on something for the 3rd party scenarios.
What ever happened to that work? I know there were a couple of drafts,
and Murray added support for one to OpenDKIM...if the 3rd party stuff
is really that important, why isn't anyone using it?
Indeed, I asked this question at a couple of industry trade groups I attend,
MAAWG being one of them. The answer I generally get is that the key delegation
already supported by DKIM works just fine, so why do we need some other
mechanism that hits the DNS yet again and employs some complex policy
expression language?
There has been no uptake at all in OpenDKIM for ATPS, and almost none is
apparent with ADSP, although in the latter case our data can only give a range
for adoption because we don't query when an author signature passes. I could
tighten that down by running five figures worth of TXT queries if we really
feel the need to be more accurate.
I don't know of any public implementations of the other schemes.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html