Re: WG Review: Domain Keys Identified Mail (dkim)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

--On onsdag, desember 21, 2005 05:36:08 -0800 "william(at)elan.net" <william@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

I also think that if allowed to be presented alternatives to putting
public keys in DNS, those would technically be found superior and less
damaging to internet. Other aspects of proposal also had alternatives
that are superior, but by bypassing MASS and presenting DKIM in current
form with constraints on discussion, all that "mess" is avoided.

My usual immediate response to anything that contains the phrase "allowed to be presented" is "where's the draft".

Yes, the drafts and proposals were published as part of MASS.
I have links to most of that at:
 http://www.elan.net/~william/emailsecurity/emailsignatures-comparisonmatrix.htm

Yes, the DKIM group clearly purposely bypassed discussions as part of
MASS (i.e. ietf open forum) in order to do it in private and leave only one authorization method (i.e. public keys in dns; it so happens that public keys in dns is also core of the Yahoo's patent and other authorization method do not have such IPR constraints).

And yes in case you don't know BoF chairs and AD did deny request to
present alternatives to DKIM when it was still called MASS BoF.

MASS had its BOF and its mailing list, so I'm assuming that whoever participated in that discussion discovered the fact that they could publish an internet-draft for ANYTHING without prior approval, as long as it was done in their own name and not in the IETF's.
So in this case, the drafts might actually be out there.

If so - what's the draft names?

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]