[ietf-dkim] Issue 1550 - the name of the document (remains open *briefly*); there's still,disagreement on "Author"

[MH Michael Hammer (5304)]

As the person who originally threw out the suggestion of ADSP on the
list (only half seriously), I agree with Pete. The author does not sign
and the author does not set the policy. It is the domain that is signing
(by virtue of publishing the DNS records, even if the author happens to
sign at the MUA/MSA) and the domain which is expressing the policy.

Mike 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org 
>[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
>Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 2:33 PM
>To: dcrocker at bbiw.net
>Cc: ietf-dkim at mipassoc.org
>Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1550 - the name of the document 
>(remains open *briefly*); there's still,disagreement on "Author"
>
>
>Thanks Dave, I'd meant to start a timer on this.
>
>Let's say folks have 1 week to suggest new names (without long 
>essays please, Dave's mail is a good model). The issue here is 
>solely the name.
>
>After that we'll take a strawpoll as mentioned yesterday.
>That'll start on the 19th and run for two weeks, just to be 
>sure to be sure.
>
>I think a strawpoll where you can +1 all the ones you like 
>might work (if we've more than 2 or 3 options). Happy to get 
>feedback on that.
>
>S.
>
>Dave Crocker wrote:
>> Largely to repeat what I said at the mic, yesterday:
>> 
>> The switch from SSP to ASP was the simplest possible change that 
>> modified the semantics of the name to be tailored to the 
>From field, as it needs to be.
>> 
>> That said, I think that Pete's desire for an even more precise name, 
>> which is thereby less subject to any misinterpretation, is worth 
>> considering.  I'm not sure it's important to change the name 
>further, 
>> but I think that considering his concern is worthwhile, if only to 
>> force us to make sure we have community agreement on the 
>nature, scope, whatever of this work:
>> 
>> I take Pete's concern as basically being that the published 
>record is 
>> by the domain cited in the From field, rather than by the user (full 
>> email address.)
>> 
>> He's right.  So ADSP (Author Domain Signing Practices) would be 
>> semantically better.  Since people are saying "ASP" as 
>letters, rather 
>> than a pseudo-word, "ADSP" isn't worse in terms of aesthetics.
>> 
>> And as I noted, if folk want the name to be pronounceable, 
>From Domain 
>> Signing Practices (frodosip) might satisfy the requirement...
>> 
>> d/
>_______________________________________________
>NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
>http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
>