ietf-mailsig
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Narrow the scope: no new email signature protocol

2004-10-07 13:34:47


On Oct 7, 2004, at 12:24 PM, domainkeys-feedbackbase01(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com 
wrote:


--- Andrew Newton <andy(_at_)hxr(_dot_)us> wrote:


On Oct 7, 2004, at 2:49 AM, domainkeys-feedbackbase01(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com 
wrote:

S/MIME is not a common building block in any significant
email program that deals with Internet email.

Except for Outlook and Mozilla based MUAs.  That's a lot of programs.

Come on Andy; the discussion clearly relates to internet email transport programs - those that are most interested and are most likely to be early participants in MASS. Citing Mozilla and Outlook in this context is unlikely to
sway MTA authors.

You clearly said "email program" and mentioned Yahoo and AOL. If you were simply talking about MTAs then excuse me, but I do not think you were being clear. Besides, components of Mozilla and OpenSSL are readily available to MTA authors.

Given your statement above, I doubt this would do much to change your
mind.

Not so. All I'm suggesting is that nothing less than real-world, relevant evidence, is what is needed prior to making credible claims in MASS space. Do
you think anyone will be sufficiently convinced with less than that?

So you'll accept reducing the scope to no new email protocols if I (or somebody else) can demonstrate that it can be done?

Well, if you've got data or hard-core experience suggesting that S/MIME
(or PGP) will not work, let's hear it.  You've obviously got some deep
prejudice against S/MIME.  If it has a problem, I do not want to use
it.

The deep prejudice has been identified numerous times.

I realize that I am often slow and daft, so can you provide pointers?

The trivial part of MASS is the engineering. As others have said, the hard part of MASS is convincing a huge deployment to change. Expounding on the problems of S/MIME is not an agent of change - it's merely flailing on an IETF mailing
list. Something I promise not to do to further.

Finally, something we can agree upon. The thing that is new here and is the agent of change is the key distribution and not the method of providing email signatures.

-andy


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>