On Tue 18/Aug/2020 01:21:33 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The industry in general, and the IETF in particular, have chosen not
to pursue widespread use of any kind of standards-based third party
domain signature policy or reputation system. That's the obvious
consensus, and in my opinion the reasons for that fact are sound.
Based (also) on the following quoted paragraphs, I wouldn't call this
state of affairs a choice or a consensus. It's just a series of failures.
Both ATPS (individual submission, experimental, February 2012) and the
REPUTE series of documents (working group, standards track, late 2013)
saw nearly zero adoption after publication even when free reference
implementations were provided. They differ from basic DKIM in that
they require non-trivial upkeep, and that appears to be a step
function inhibiting adoption among operators.
[...] As I said before, I'm disappointed that things like ATPS and
REPUTE never got a serious attempt, but that's not because they
were oppressed or sabotaged. That's just the reality we're in.
We can still try again. In particular, the non-trivial upkeep seems
to be a valid diagnosis.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
