As you probably recall, the focus of MARID was on LMAP solutions, SPF
namely. The reputation proposals have the same problems we had here.
It was never a surprise to see the same issues - a Reputation
protocol requires Batteries and a market we were not ready for.
DKIM's pins on the side are the same issues and reasons CSV/DNA went
nowhere. We lost focus on securing author-domain operations
foremost. The 3rd party should of been secondary , and if I recall
that was the original charter - see how to fit list systems in after
the fact. Instead, it became a principle 3rd party anyone can sign
without restriction protocol and author domains lost all controls.
I find it difficult, yet interesting to see how DKIM can work well in
this mode. It risk if not already, of become a high bandwidth mail
stamping protocol that serves very little purpose and without a doubt
absolutely no purpose in the world of anonymous mail transaction where
all the problems exist. We don't have a real problem with known
transactions and we certainly don't need DKIM for that.
Mark Delany wrote:
DKIM should be viewed as a Work-In-Progress still missing a viable
policy layer.
+1. But 5+ years WIP? :) It wasn't rocket science.
Well, 7+ years ago it was suggested that "Domain policy is nascent"
with the stated expectation that MARID would soon develop something
comprehensive to satisfy our needs...
Apropos rocket science, at our current rate of progress we risk
outliving the Space Shuttle program.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html