Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 8:39 AM -0800 12/12/03, Tony Hain wrote:
> >vinton g. cerf wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Unfortunately, the discussion has tended to center on ICANN as the
> only
> >> really visible example of an organization attempting to develop policy
> >> (which is being treated as synonymous with "governance"
> >
> >To further your point, an area completely outside of ICANN's purview, yet
> an
> >area requiring governance is PKI. We are at the point where deployment of
> a
> >PKI has moved beyond technical issues, becoming almost completely the
> policy
> >& politics of "trust". Until the politicians broker the trust
> relationships,
> >there is nothing technology can do.
>
> s/politicians/politicians and business community/
>
> Absolutely agree with this sentiment. Anyone who starts an anti-spam
> proposal with "All we need to do is digitally sign the {messages|SMTP
> transmissions}..." is completely unclear on how little governance
> there is in this area.
>From a strictly mail technology standpoint, all we should ever do is enforce
signatures. Anything else is simply recreating technology we already have.
>From the solution to spam standpoint, I agree the governance of trust plays
a much bigger role and will be the gating item in whatever technical
approach happens.
Tony
FWIW: I specifically left out the business community because they always
find a way to make money in whatever context the politicians create (even if
it takes influencing the politicians to create a favorable context).