On Sun, Jan 26, 2025, at 11:38, Michael Thomas wrote: > > > On 1/25/25 4:01 PM, Richard Clayton wrote: > > In message <[email protected]>, Michael > > Thomas <[email protected]> writes > > > > > Can somebody explain to me why the "back scatter" problem is related to > > > DKIM of any version? > > > > because our DKIM2 proposal fixes it > > > > if only all your questions were so straightforward to answer > > > I'm asking about the propriety of making changes to the overall email > architecture in a working group that isn't the appropriate place to do > so. Kitchen sink specifications are not a good thing.
Do you propose that: a) the work happen somewhere else b) that it not happen c) that it be split up into pieces, or d) something else? > Murray -- I share Dave's overall concern that the charter in its current > form way too vague about what and why the goals are. I feel like every iteration of the charter that I've written and the draft that has already been posted in this thread multiple times are really quite clear about the both the issues that this effort is trying to solve, and the reasons why they are real issues faced by many email systems out in the real world. I'm quite concerned by the amount of "NO" energy that this effort is receiving, and it's a general risk with an organisation that has been around for as long as the IETF. Everyone wants to have an opinion on every technology they have touched. Fair enough. But eventually everything gets mired in molasses and you can't progress any more. I'm fine with "I don't want to be involved in this"... but there's real demand for this work. I wish I'd arrived at the IETF before ARC was published because there would have been a chance to fix ARC rather than having to come back and do all this again. I was too fresh to the IETF to do more than write a rant about how it was broken: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/4Gu1EErK4iuo9pQnZ-uJ2tKpMDQ/ But the problems that ARC didn't address are real problems, and that's why ARC hasn't had as rapid adoption as I expect DKIM2 (as described in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gondwana-dkim2-motivation/) to get. And the reason I expect it to get more adoption is that it brings significantly more value. It solves more of the problems that email operators are facing. The previous "dkim-replay" attempt didn't, which is why it didn't make progress, but the discussions which led to this proposal came out of that. Bron. -- Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
