On Fri 31/Mar/2023 13:59:40 +0200 Barry Leiba wrote:
Compare that with the move to https everywhere. Having to get certificates and
encrypting and decrypting all stuff is certainly not an interoperability
improvement.
Say WHAT? There's no interoperability issue there.
Oldish software didn't have SSL support, or was unable to upgrade to the latest
version of TLS, a moving target in that respect.
For publishers, getting a certificate implied expenses and getting into
commercial agreement with a set of recognized providers.
There's some effort involved in doing it, and one has to weigh that
effort against what one gets out of it. But it interoperates just
fine once you make the effort. It's not the same thing at all.
There are experimental protocols and proposals. If there is no recognized
reputation providers, there are lots of DNSxLs. If MLMs adopt the necessary
changes and receivers set up whitelisting-after-subscription everything
interoperates just fine.
Indeed, DMARC has been causing that disruption for several years now. MLMs
have adapted. Useless to close the stable door after the horse has bolted.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
