Re: [Bimi] Alternate proposal

Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com> Thu, 21 July 2022 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <todd.herr@valimail.com>
X-Original-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247B4C16ECBE for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2022 08:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=valimail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Re-TTc6mpfEa for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2022 08:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72BB7C16ECBA for <bimi@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2022 08:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2a.google.com with SMTP id p132so3404722yba.3 for <bimi@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2022 08:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=valimail.com; s=google2048; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=03hxpZXmh6jX7JN5sp0pgOWGwYls6Eqc4dodTMWAAZ0=; b=SRLv8VySOXqi4b2EtqCpFkIA5nfQ2Pfn1Rj4MpiChdP4ZpJSzQRQnrjEKsPOCFjMtc xA0DnKHH46yw0kQn/RLJV4lnG04ERGHkocgt6+tQmSBkD08/tVXdU0xcrKfpKECg/7cU XZbNrEvAslytOzFxGa9sJZLhhZ95eWLve1QWdu/NzrC0Nnf6+nyBmkbktBaHF6lODK5H zUFlthc3HpEf4o/NpVL6DFurfpSfKAnAUgVB7nCSOQ06HCxjvsjChIkckBkvH/NXNK61 /4KvFcW6WPDprjZYXvFLtRSz6Catf664laF4itA9q1HdX9JbJB9vYXnGV9YXk7DvkkxR Dvrg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=03hxpZXmh6jX7JN5sp0pgOWGwYls6Eqc4dodTMWAAZ0=; b=Ayq8Twwq4CsVeq3d8CSr8oHdodd+/tQNlA+KjmbCqxc5rBHu9ecV3jgj9NSwA/OK/B LU4joqIXCillrZ0uMqrZpEx12CzdUIJ1EehZ97ONk3xBf1XNDj9QbfLv3eU6Od9k/CSN OzEJMnuBZw5sEZud81cYs6nNc8uQJ5Houza1PRGs4hqz0/K8mPRU5QzakKUqb2IohC6D FEK18Wzd2uPdv685jYGN+94pWcD8XyOJoxbR86ycPTCAiAIhlLcDsJtSnPPnJIxdwDlO MyCbMA9VKNVkavXgPlPRejUQToUGO2UwckeX1/GLu12+ayL9yiGnceGrzSPCObBzykwK 1xow==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+ImNAVSe1b0TpAGd+m1T5KPlOzv+IlTBu+SrqxNQBRWqgB9wYa n9iA42G8V7+8krpV2jbvBhcvbfcObHIaCDuleiom2HteYJw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1u5Q8syuRyWOo4Lwo+MhStaZob1tkL/ZU79Cj0XlDHoCavR58WGFCoFoUHjJjelo30LUiwlfE+tiHPy3C4jigQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:afd4:0:b0:670:8b93:20bc with SMTP id d20-20020a25afd4000000b006708b9320bcmr10863371ybj.226.1658417971306; Thu, 21 Jul 2022 08:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3E050BDC62D7946860C5E1E6@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <3E050BDC62D7946860C5E1E6@PSB>
From: Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 11:39:15 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHej_8nHgAVWNLDk11j4gY+KxY+e=gcAAzJHryWXELQoY+65Ww@mail.gmail.com>
To: bimi@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000011b5ef05e452864e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bimi/_aF0HUifIVgmllIjHTGKVN-s4n4>
Subject: Re: [Bimi] Alternate proposal
X-BeenThere: bimi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Brand Indicators for Message Identification <bimi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bimi/>
List-Post: <mailto:bimi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 15:39:37 -0000

On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 10:16 PM John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:

> As promised in my recent "Radical critique" note, a suggestion
> about a completely different way to approach the BIMI problem,
> one that would be far less complex and problematic.  This is
> just an outline with many details left to be filled in -- my
> purpose in sending the note is to encourage people to think
> differently about the issues and see if there is interest in
> further discussion.
>
> [snip]
>
> Would something along those lines make any sense at all?
>

I can't answer your question, but I do know that there is already running
code for BIMI, written against the draft spec as it currently exists.

It would be up to the implementers to decide if they're willing to scrap
their currently running code and start over with something new.

-- 

*Todd Herr * | Technical Director, Standards and Ecosystem
*e:* todd.herr@valimail.com
*m:* 703.220.4153

This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.