On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 14:24, Michel Py wrote:
Jim Lyon wrote:
In summary, the requirements that drove the
current design include:
1. It MUST be possible for organizations to publish email
policy records without installing any new software. (This
pushes us toward TXT records.)
Douglas Otis wrote:
There is an aspect of Jim's comment that
deserves clarification.
To the contrary, I don't think there is, as he specifically used the
word "publish"; Jim's text is perfectly clear to me. I'm not sure that I
parsed your reply correctly, but it appears that you are not making any
difference between "publish" and "implement", when they are the two
opposite ends.
There is a problem in that the "core" proposal is adding restrictions on
a TXT record where few exist but stops short of ensuring further changes
occur as a result of a standards process. For expediency, it would be
easier to implement a mechanism taking advantage of existing DNS
records. There is a peril of allowing this record to evolve outside the
standards process where such sentiment is encompassed by this statement
and made explicit in the proposal.
Consider the network traffic sustaining a mail stream if multiple probes
for each message are required for a discovery process incurred out of a
desire to simplify publishing. Worse yet, these queries may return
records in excess of the size of the mail being checked. Looking to
simplify an aspect of deployment must consider the entire process. To
premise a design based upon an architecture where SMTP rarely enters
without a bridging component may place too much emphasis on this aspect
over perhaps more pressing matters having to do with the overall
integrity of the system.
-Doug