[ietf-dkim] DKIM 3rd party Authorization using DKIM-Conditional

[Hector Santos <[e-mail]>]

On 2/12/2018 12:40 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
> Just for fun I sent in a new I-D of the dkim-conditional draft that
> takes out version numbers and adds feature tags in a backward
> compatible way.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dkim-conditional/


+1.

But just for fun?  I wish you would believe more in your work. Take it 
more serious.  If you had done so with ADSP, while we might be at the 
same position today with its replacement DMARC, we would at least 
saved a number of IETF man-years as well.  Same problem then today. 
But perhaps the author still doesn't really believe in the policy 
model, yet does these types of DKIM Policy proposals.

I rather work on this proposal (over ARC) because it directly 
addresses the key principle DKIM POLICY problem regarding the lack of 
a 3rd party resigning authorization mechanism with minimum code change 
and expense.  It offers a bigger bang for the buck leveraging years of 
IETF DKIM Policy Model R&D already done.   We just didn't have the 
POLICY advocates back then as we do today. So perhaps this time it can 
be different with some of the past policy advocates posting again.

But since we seem to have an curious aversion towards optimizing the 
solution using a simple DNS lookup, i.e. DMARC+ATPS, the DKIM 
conditional 3rd party authorization derivative would be the next best 
thing.

This work should taken seriously with first the author believing in 
his work.

Thanks

-- 
HLS


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