From: owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of John R
Levine
It's a really bad idea to expect the installed base to change
any time soon to adapt to a proposed standard. It's a
guaranteed ticket to failure.
Agreed, which is the reason that the attempt to insist that MASS require a
new DNS RR type is doomed to fail. If MASS is going to choose IETF process
then we should get an undertaking from the IESG in advance that no such
requirement will be made. Otherwise there are at least two equally
presitgeous organizations which are very supportive.
I am quite happy for another spec to advance deployment by getting pulled
along in my slipstream. Chaining itself to my bumper so that I cannot move
an inch unless it does as well is another matter. People who deploy MASS
will want DNSSEC sooner or later which will in turn mean they want DNSEXT,
but there is no point in writing a spec that is dependent on prior
deployment of DNSEXT.
It is possible to get the installed base to make certain type of changes,
provided that they are minor, do not remove existing functionality and
provide a benefit for the party making the change.
Interestingly some mailing lists (Yahoo groups I believe) are reported to be
S/MIME friendly, but the problem is there is no way to know which list is
which so they might as well all not provide support.
This gets us to the real nub of the matter, what we are talking about is a
situation where the ENTIRE installed base has to move before deployment is
possible, ain't going to happen.