Hi, John Levine wrote: > It is painfully > evident that few people in this discussion have any experience with > mail systems other than their own, and none with large (millions of > mailboxes), and generalizing from limited experience is never a good > idea.
I see interest in the email hosting market to implement the openpgpkey draft. I know of email service provider that already have deployed the openpgpkey draft, and others are prepared to go online once the draft is stable or published as an RFC. Adoption in the market is important, and for these providers with experience with a large number of mailboxes, the draft seems to be "good enough". The openpgpkey draft, as it is now, is a better way to retrieve PGP keys than we had before (keyserver, LDAP, http-server). It would be painful to see the adoption of openpgpkey to slow down or die because of the draft being stuck in discussion. I'm in favor of advancing the current draft to RFC status (experimental if needed), gain operational experience with deployments, and come back for improvements if required. Carsten Strotmann
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ dane mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
