James Couzens wrote:
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 08:52 -0800, Rand Wacker wrote:
There is currently very little deployment of IIM or SES, and little
indication that will grow soon. There are already a number of large
sites signing/checking DK, so there is real sender benefit to implement.
I still have hopes that IIM and DK will centralize on a standard spec,
so I didn't want to confuse the issue with two (comparably expensive)
crypto approaches yet without major benefits to doing so.
Oh I see, so this is a POPULARITY CONTEST. Well, glad to see it will be
the MOST POPULAR cryptography scheme that gets all the attention (yes
just as stupid as saying "yeah it was in the last place I looked").
Glad to see you are right on top of everything over there at Sendmail
Surprised you just didn't go ahead and imply that Yahoo was paying us to
support DK (although I'm sure that Cisco would have deeper pockets in
that regards).
Its not a popularity contest, these recommendations are specifically
aimed at our customers (both open source and commercial) who want some
guidance on what they should be doing with sender authentication. Based
on where things are today and likely going in the next six months, it
makes much more sense for people to deploy DK than IIM. We've analyzed
both approaches closely, worked directly with both of the teams, and
continue to do so, so this recommendation not based on what popular
opinion is.
-Rand