[ietf-dkim] A proposal for restructuring SSP

[Siegel, Ellen]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
> bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 10:32 AM
> To: ietf-dkim at mipassoc.org
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] A proposal for restructuring SSP
> 
> On Monday 28 January 2008 10:18, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
> > I'd like to voice my support for Bill's position, notwithstanding
#1360
> > from a year ago.
> >
> > The reality is that many smaller domain owners rely on their ISP or
some
> > other service provider to deal with the "under-the-hood" stuff. The
> > cname suggestion is interesting but I  haven't had time to think it
> > through.
> >
> 
> I've done this with some customers.  As long as:
> 
> 1.  Their DNS provider supports it.
> 
> 2.  They don't mess it up.

Those caveats are pretty significant for a lot of smaller domain owners.
It's not generally the case that DNS providers provide easy-to-use tools
for creating arbitrary authentication-related records. And unless the
tools are *really* good, they won't do much to solve the "they don't
mess it up" part even if they do exist. 

Ellen 

> 
> it works fine.
> 
> >From my limited experience, most DNS providers support TXT now, but
the
> underscore is often problematic.  I've had more than one problem with
"Not
> a
> valid hostname" errors.  Of course that's correct, but misses the
point
> that
> not all domain names are host names.  I expect that in time this will
> change.
> 
> The biggest problem is getting non-technical domain owners to
correctly
> publish the CNAME.
> 
> Scott K
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html