Re: bozoproofing the net, was The Value of Reputation

On Jan 1, 2006, at 8:35 AM, John C Klensin wrote:

> --On Sunday, 01 January, 2006 04:35 +0000 John Levine
> <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com> wrote:
>
> > I hope the message here is not that we should restrict ourselves  
> > to developing technology that is idiot-proof, since a sufficiently  
> > determined idiot, of which there are many, will do idiotic things  
> > with any technology that we never in a million years would have  
> > anticipated.
> No.  I don't believe in idiot-proof technologies.  I do believe  
> that it is not desirable to create standards that would give a gift  
> of either technology or justification to those who would use them  
> to fragment the network.  I believe it is especially important to  
> avoid those gifts when the people or groups involved are quite  
> sophisticated about using technologies to maximize their short- 
> term  economic gain at the cost of global communications and  
> interoperability.
The risks related to interoperability will more likely result from  
assuming authorization authenticates the source.  This authorization  
strategy may benefit larger domains, but will be corrosive to goals  
of interoperability and integrity.  To avoid the misapplication of  
this mechanism, there are suitable alternatives to authorization for  
the DKIM effort.  DKIM offers a significant value without  
authorization to establish expectations.  Not endorsing authorization  
schemes also discourages possible burden-shifting of the short- 
comings of DKIM.  Hopefully, not allowing this tactic will lead to a  
better, safer, and far more fair solutions.
-Doug

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf