So I interpret your post to mean that you want the signature to *break*
whenever it goes through a mailing list. Is that accurate?
-d
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Dave
Crocker
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 7:45 AM
To: Jim Fenton
Cc: ietf-mailsig(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: mailing list software, was What does the mailsig
mechanismmean?
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:29:58 -0800, Jim Fenton wrote:
I agree that mailing lists should re-sign messages. But I expect
that it will take quite a while before that happens, and in the
meanwhile, I want the original signature to work wherever possible.
and it will take quite awhile for other sending software to start
signing, too. shall we try to compensate for them, too, somehow?
what is significant about the current thread is the nature of the
analysis that needs to be done, to handle the changes a mailing list
can introduce into a previously-signed message.
internet standards that rely on these kinds of statistical and case
analyses make for complex, problematic implementation and testing.
"complex, probleman implementation and testing" is a code-phrase for
"difficult to adopt and make interoperate on large scale".
anyone with internet-scale testing, deployment and use experience to
the contrary should speak up.
Folks -- we are working in a topic that has an unbroken track record
of failing to gain ANY large-scale successes in the entire history of
the IETF, in spite of repeated attempts.
This track record calls for taking the most narrow, focused approach
we can. This means the specification should be absolutely minimalist.
We should strive for the most basic and straightforward capability we
can.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
www.brandenburg.com