> On Mar 28, 2023, at 1:36 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > > Since the chair is threatening to ban me, I decided to write up my view of > things in a longer form. > > https://rip-van-webble.blogspot.com/2023/03/on-dmarc-arc-and-dkim-replays.html > > This has some technical aspects and meta aspects. The meta aspects can be > addressed in the blog comments itself instead of here. > > Mike
Mike, I asked ChatGPT 4.0 to summarize your extensive blog post for me. Summary: The blog post discusses concerns related to DMARC, ARC, and DKIM Replays in the context of email security and the working group's efforts to address these issues. The author expresses confusion and skepticism about the necessity and effectiveness of the proposed solutions. Top concerns and conflicts: 1. Unclear motivations and politics behind DMARC: The author questions the reasons behind DMARC's creation and its differences from ADSP, as well as the intentions of the working group members involved. 2. ARC's purpose and necessity: The author doubts the need for ARC, which recreates DKIM and Authentication-Results with minor tweaks, and its ability to solve mailing list traversal problems. 3. DKIM Replay problem and lack of clear solutions: The blog post raises concerns about the lack of consensus on how to address the issue of DKIM Replays, as well as the opacity of mailbox providers' practices. 4. Insufficient information and secrecy: The author argues that the lack of transparency from mailbox providers and the closed nature of industry groups like M3AAWG hinder the working group's ability to develop effective solutions. 5. Ineffective proposed solutions: The blog post criticizes the solutions proposed so far, arguing that they do not seem practical or likely to work. 6. Unclear definition of success: The author points out that there is no clear goal for the working group to achieve, as the spam issue is not a matter of absolutes but rather probabilities. 7. Passive-aggressive working group chairs: The author criticizes the behavior of the working group chairs, suggesting that they may have their own agendas or be uninterested in finding solutions. 8. Doubtful effectiveness of the rechartered working group: The author believes that the working group's track record, combined with the lack of available tools and knowledge within the IETF community, makes success unlikely. — HLS _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
