[Mimedefang] Reputation Reporting Protocol submitted to IETF as an I-D
David F. Skoll
dfs at roaringpenguin.com
Sun Jun 20 10:45:52 EDT 2010
Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
> Yes. IMHO you should create protocol capable to support other
> "sender signature" types even if for long time only one
> type is going to be supported.
Hmm... I think that's over-engineering. We can always change the
protocol version number if we need to add this capability, but I don't
really see the need.
If we wanted to design strong privacy and authentication into the protocol,
we'd use something like DTLS rather than reinventing the wheel. (But that
goes against the low-bandwidth, low-overhead design goal.)
More information about the MIMEDefang