On 4/15/2015 8:55 PM, Terry Zink wrote:
Hi, Hector,
For the umpteenth time, not everyone need 4000 domains. Most of the
domains that will or may utilize it, simply don't need this scale.
I'm not sure you get the point that the others are trying to make. While this
*may* scale for small domains (a big maybe),
Terry,
Its not a "big maybe." Its in production code. It already been shown
to scale. Smaller, even mid size organizations are simply not going to
have this registration problem. Most domains are not going to need
millions, nor thousand and probably not even hundreds of domains. Even
if they did, its manageable.
... it won't scale for large domains like Hotmail, Yahoo, Google, AOL, and a
lot of other large providers who are unlikely to implement it. They make up a
small number of implementers but a massive number of users. If it won't work
for this massive user base, then it's not worth implementing even on a small
scale because for the average user (of which there are millions), the people
they try to send to (Hotmail, Google, Yahoo) aren't supporting this.
You know, I'll leave it at this.
The same was said that no one will implement DKIM Policy ideas. And
even if they did, it was said, that no one will use prepare hard
policies, and even if they did, it was said, no one will turn on the
rejection switch, that no one will honor it, especially the MLM.
Well, we are here because it did happen. Questionable decisions were
made in the past to abandoned policy ideas and its being repeated again.
If the only problem is registration, this is not a reason to limit the
protocol to just 1st party lookups.
Finally, to use "large providers" arguments is generally not how IETF
protocols are designed. I I will even suggest it borderlines
conflict of IETF interest. There are millions of private operation
domains and quite a few SMTP implementators. Not everyone uses Office
365, Hillary had her own servers :). They all will not have this
registration issue and the protocol makes good engineering sense
across the board. The direction the WG is headed is not only more
unsecured but will exert more cost and pressure on everyone else.
Thats not good, especially when the decision is the leave out the best
idea we have for ALL kinds for systems, not just the big guy.
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
