On 06/04/16 09:52, Daniel Margolis wrote: > But even if we'd prefer TACK (which > isn't unreasonable by itself), do we really want to deviate from the > well-trodden path of webPKI? I think not--browser-to-webmail HTTPS is > already an existing piece of attack surface for most users, so reusing it > here is somewhat sensible.
Speaking as the maintainer of an MTA, no it is not. Having to add support for another protocol to an application which deals in SMTP, and knows how to use a library to get DNS, just feels wrong. I'd feel an extreme lack of enthusiasm for ever getting around to implementing such. -- Jeremy [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
