[ietf-dkim] a bit of philosophy on working group productivityandscope

[Arvel Hathcock]

> I think not.  I think I'm trying to say that what you defined as minimally 
> useful isn't sufficently useful to be worth the effort of a working group. 
> I think the minimum needs to be higher.

I agree with that.

> What I am attempting to say is that I do not believe there is any 
> sigificant value in signing some new, invisible e-mail identity.  For it 
> to have value, it needs to relate to a current, visible identity.

It *can* have value even without being tied to an internal message header 
because you can always use the identity (whatever it is) as a filter input. 
I completely agree with Dave on this point.  But this value is nowhere near 
sufficient protection for a domain owner.  DKIM without a required SSP is 
almost totally ineffective in protecting the rights of a domain owner.

What I'd like to know is whether Dave's view has any support or not.  There 
are many people who haven't commented on this topic.

-- 
Arvel