RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP requirements

[<[e-mail]>]

It's  an Analogy Son, an Ananalogy. Thanks for the link. The issue is
how do disparate systems agree on how to talk to one another, declare
reasonably enforced rules and abide by them. According to many here a
SYN does not need to be followed by a ACK but perhaps a SWIFTY is
perfectly reasonable and should be understood and enacted upon by both
parties.

Bill Oxley 
Messaging Engineer 
Cox Communications, Inc. 
Alpharetta GA 
404-847-6397 
[e-mail] 


-----Original Message-----
From: John L [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 1:13 AM
To: Oxley, Bill (CCI-Atlanta)
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP requirements

> How does the post office do it? It receives mail from other countries
> and determines what kind of stamps official franking etc to either
> deliver or return to sender unopened.

International postal mail is one of the worst possible analogies for 
Internet mail.  It's a closed system consisting of only 190 post
offices, 
each of which is a national monopoly.  All the security is at the 
perimeter, i.e., when you mail a letter to England, the USPS checks that

the stamp is real, but when the USPS hands it to RM, RM assumes it's OK.

There's a complex settlement scheme to share postage revenue when the 
bilateral flow of mail is unbalanced which has no online equivalent,
thank 
goodness.

And, of course, there's no identity security at all on postal mail.  I
can 
write "Bill Oxley" as the return address on a letter, mail it, and no
post 
office will notice or care.

Although it is completely irrelevant to Internet mail, the international

postal system, which goes back to the 1870s, and its history are quite 
interesting.  See http://www.upu.int.

> DKIM is an electronic stamp, SSP (to me) appears to be the franking
> system.

This is so wrong I don't know where to start.

R's,
John

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