Scott Kitterman wrote: >> Roland Turner wrote: > >> This is just a diffusion process, not an exclusion of smaller players. >> Indeed, it would almost appear that you'd be happier if the big guys had >> excluded smaller players from this initiative... > > Until maybe someday the results of the analysis to use ARC are somehow > available, they have.
All diffusion looks like this. The "one size fits all" mentality gave us the lost decade. Recognising that differently-situated practitioners need different things and developing a range of tools/protocols/etc. to suit the range of needs (most of which will be not useful for most practitioners) is not merely more effective, it currently appears to be the only way forward. > The use of an open standard (which I am in favor of and > this is good), doesn't materially change that. If I can write code to > implement a standard, but don't have the necessary inputs to use it, it's not > particularly of use. "not particularly of use to Scott" != "not useful". This is of course a different question to the one about whether/how to involve yourself, more below. > Personally, I try to consider putting my time where either I'll benefit Eminently sensible, I do the same. > or I think the global Internet will benefit. Likewise, and so here's the challenge: the big guys hardening their part of the environment against criminals doesn't merely improve life for the big guys (e.g. by shifting criminals' focus elsewhere), they are so big that they are materially altering the economics in a way that makes crime less profitable and therefore less likely than it would otherwise be. This directly benefits the global Internet in a way that a batteries-included-but-less-impactful approach could not, even assuming that such an approach exists (are you aware of one?). Do you really mean "or", or do you actually mean "and"? We are talking about an initiative that, if successful, will materially benefit the global Internet, even though you personally will not be able wield the resulting tool for some time, or possibly even ever (unlikely, but possible). Do you support it anyway? (A less charitable interpretation is that your concern is merely resentment or envy of large organisations. Presumably this is not correct.) - Roland _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
