IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] DMARC working group charter proposal

Scott Kitterman <scott@kitterman.com> Mon, 01 April 2013 23:44 UTC

Return-Path: <scott@kitterman.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C1B21F8F28 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kHCPGBBsL7GS for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout02.controlledmail.com (mailout02.controlledmail.com [72.81.252.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B62C221F8F0C for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout02.controlledmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout02.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D8020E40D5; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=kitterman.com; s=2007-00; t=1364859873; bh=Cm3ItqjzpE/cpewRT/1YSrKQ4XkeFGU8oXQLYikwn0U=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=PMFa4fv7SNoWwQFORsj0amaR1aO/gQ0Xb8OR8qPbdcJm3ORMwxVPga5Az/B4QVhIx iPAqtqRDyQtNR04kG2WB1yZRFmKk4BKfPJ99tFbrmAVlWLHFiFaeN4hfuibIZ1iAGs sPPN6hp4ktbqkDZvv6q7AZvgpx6uDdBvzQVIhrOQ=
Received: from scott-latitude-e6320.localnet (static-72-81-252-21.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout02.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE00120E4090; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <scott@kitterman.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:44:32 -0400
Message-ID: <1391800.uByxAVik4Q@scott-latitude-e6320>
User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.5.0-26-generic; KDE/4.9.5; i686; ; )
In-Reply-To: <515A1581.9030402@dcrocker.net>
References: <CAL0qLwYc757fw_VhPMHDrgcCimNFak02brDRLAVTq+NR4w34pA@mail.gmail.com> <515A0895.2090209@cs.tcd.ie> <515A1581.9030402@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] DMARC working group charter proposal
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 23:44:35 -0000

On Monday, April 01, 2013 04:17:21 PM Dave Crocker wrote:
> Stephen,
> 
> DKIM had far less installed base on large operational services than
> DMARC now has.

Right.  DKIM had no installed base.  Just for clarity (I imagine you are), 
you're referring to the DomainKeys installed base?

Scott K

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email