At this point, I personally see little value in "moving forward" with 
the MLM draft until the ADSP issues and 3rd party signer consideration 
are resolved. I think once we resolve the POLICY issue as it relates 
to list servers or any allowed 3rd party signer and consensus can be 
reached, then I believe the MLM guidelines can be better specified.  I 
hope documents authors can step up and help resolve this long time 
known issue once and for all.

I personally do not believe it is a major issue and can be resolved 
simply by codifying the documents by relaxing the 5322.From bind and 
allowed for 3rd party signature policy declarations.  (Note, just in 
case, I am not referring to the problematic authorized signers 
considerations.)

-- 
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com


Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> There was very little response to my last straw poll about where we go with 
> the MLM draft next.  It certainly wasn't enough to be able to claim "rough 
> consensus" from a group this size.
> 
> I have some feedback on the actual text from Jeff, Daniel and Dave to 
> incorporate, and I haven't forgotten that.  But there remains the issue of 
> whether or not to split it into two or three documents covering specific 
> topics (a non-DKIM MLM BCP, a DKIM-specific MLM BCP, and a DKIM value-add for 
> MLMs informational), and whether or not to just drop the whole affair because 
> there's not enough we can really say anyway.
> 
> Given my druthers I'd like to proceed with it the way it is since absent 
> rough consensus to change course, the right thing to do seems to be to press 
> on.  (After thinking about that a bit, I have to admit that it's also the 
> most attractive to me since it's the least amount of work...)
> 
> Is anybody going to be really upset if I go that route and then work toward a 
> WGLC later this year?
> 
> -MSK
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
> 
> 




_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to