----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas Otis" <dotis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I see the cycle as going like this: We need at least one > > standardized, moderately-useful system for weakly authenticating > > the sources of messages. > > I see the base DKIM draft forming a solid basis to identify email > sources. The ill considered SSP draft will seriously hinder the DKIM > effort. You keep saying that "every which way but loose." The thing is, I don't agree and I know I not crazy... so. :-) The bottom line is "for me" is NO SSP, NO DKIM. I won't bother. I won't waste my time. Call it want you want SSP or whatever, the process must be consistent, and if there is NO HIGH reliable DETERMINISTIC (not HEURISTIC) verification concept of a newly introduced entity into the process, then its isn't worth anything. What's the point? We will get swamped with YAHOO junk mail anyway and until the day YAHOO declares a specific POLICY on how to handle its domain mail, the DKIM/DK overhead will not be added. PERIOD. If you wish to continue to pitch "your ideas" that's fine, but you should really give it up already trying to convince people SSP will crack the earth. FWIW, NO SSP == NO DKIM. Its worth less overhead. That said, Have a happy new year. :-) -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf