You are a bit late on that one. Other groups are already building stuff
on top of DKIM key management. I have had more than one group ask me
what the least bad way of doing this would be.

I like a specification that is defined as a series of independent
modules with tightly defined interactions between them because that
leads to good code.

My view is that the DKIM protocol already meets that criteria. I think
the spec would read more clearly if it was structured in that fashion,
which to a large extent it already is.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Levine
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 12:30 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Design approach to MASS (was Re: [ietf-dkim] On 
> per-user-keying)
> 
> 
> >The signing and canonicalization process can be specified 
> independent 
> >of key management components.  The current DKIM draft 
> interleaves all 
> >of this throughout, when it does not need to be.  A simple 
> >restructuring of the document can fix this problem.
> 
> Since you asked for specific responses, I specifically 
> respond that attempting to subdivide DKIM into independent 
> subsections is a terrible idea. Please drop drop this 
> pernicious proposal now.
> 
> The design point of the DKIM canon process is to come up with 
> something that works for DKIM.  It most definitely is not to 
> come up with some general process that might be useful for 
> some other application that someone might think of in the 
> future.  Ditto the key management.  Attempts to generalize 
> designs beyond the applications they are intended for 
> inevitably lead to heat death, which is why we need to stamp 
> them out now.
> 
> If it turns out that there are future applications that can 
> reuse parts of DKIM, that would be fine and they are welcome 
> to plagiarize whatever we come up with.  But we must exclude 
> such considerations from the effort at hand in order to have 
> some chance of completing the project.
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-dkim mailing list
> [email protected] http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim

Reply via email to