IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP requirements

Damon <deepvoice@gmail.com> Mon, 07 August 2006 16:43 UTC

Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GA8C8-0005QM-Ek for ietf-dkim-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:43:12 -0400
Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GA5jd-0007my-Sx for ietf-dkim-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 10:05:37 -0400
Received: from sb7.songbird.com ([208.184.79.137]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GA5WC-00039A-Ro for ietf-dkim-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 09:51:48 -0400
Received: from sb7.songbird.com (sb7.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by sb7.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k77Dokxq020676; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 06:50:46 -0700
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.190]) by sb7.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k77DofmY020650 for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 06:50:42 -0700
Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g2so1413252nfe for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 06:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hjIdussgmHU40P4Ei/GZg6TyBziK1rpHzDWhxiNjsScKaJ9EHVukKTYtxy3P5eSOcysJGpN/OGKS0PmukhxpPEa9LiGRs1vflDv7JSCf3NQTS1anwgNa1WKto3vQjFaGWnjPyDg98FVKb5eR9O6dr/sCsefXRPoqilbq9k4Lolk=
Received: by 10.78.123.4 with SMTP id v4mr2388747huc; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 06:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.78.149.6 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 06:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <62146370608070650g380c1a78se7105aad280aeed0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 09:50:13 -0400
From: Damon <deepvoice@gmail.com>
To: Hector Santos <hsantos@santronics.com>
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP requirements
In-Reply-To: <62146370608070643n4d5877b3x1b2eb4fd4a13720e@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20060805034058.861.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <44D4FB5A.5020704@mtcc.com> <20060805163953.Q47527@simone.iecc.com> <015701c6b8e3$9f7d8c10$0201a8c0@hdev1> <62146370608070643n4d5877b3x1b2eb4fd4a13720e@mail.gmail.com>
X-Songbird: Clean, Clean
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DKIM Discussion List <ietf-dkim.mipassoc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information
X-Songbird-From: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca

I apologize. I meant to say... stop trying to steer the ship from the
sea locker.
What I said could have connotations that I did not intend at all. I apologize.

Regards,
Damon Sauer

On 8/7/06, Damon <deepvoice@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/5/06, Hector Santos <hsantos@santronics.com> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John L" <johnl@iecc.com>
> > To: "Michael Thomas" <mike@mtcc.com>
> >
> >
> > > > That's a pretty reasonable question, frankly. The set of domains that
> > > > would actually benefit from SSP from the consensus I've seen seems like
> > > > it's a pretty tiny fraction of the internet at large and almost
> > > > certainly could be handled by third party dnsbl-like or accreditation
> > > > schemes as well.
> > >
> > > Agreed.  That's what I've been thinking all along.
> >
> > In other words, your 3rd party dnsbl-like DAC business venture with some
> > highly exploitable VBR protocol, with $10,000, $5000 entry feeds, with
> > absolutely no plans for SSP, is the right solution for everyone and will
> > resolved all the security issued related to DKIM.   This wasn't about the
> > your so called "SSP FOG" rethorical chaos but rather a conflict of interest.
> > Having SSP still in play will not serve your business well.
> >
> > Wonderful.
>
> How many +1's am I allowed to put on this?
> +1
>
> Fog?! Give me a break. I have caught up with what is going on in a
> matter of days and I am NOT confused or in a fog. I have disagreements
> and suggestions, but by no means do I think we are tripping around in
> the dark here.
> To say there have been no suggestions that you have heard from
> something less strict than "I sign all" means you have not read a word
> I and others have said and especially over the last few days.
> In the movies when the Whig's pretend not to hear the cannon fire,
> it's funny- I'm not laughing.
> Stop trying to steer the ship from the purser's vault.
>
> Regards,
> Damon Sauer
>
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email