Subject: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: [Lurk] Another outside the "box" use case: DKIM

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 09:35:48 +0000

(Not sure if this list is still active, but FYI...)

LURK is an IETF mailing list that's discussing developing a
solution to the "offload TLS without giving the CDN my private
key" problem. Right now, people are trying to figure out if,
as seems likely, the above is the only use case that'll be
tackled, or if there are other relevant use-cases people are
also willing to work on.

If interested in this, please discuss it on [email-masked]

Ta,
S.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [Lurk] Another outside the "box" use case: DKIM
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 21:09:58 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
To: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>, LURK BoF <[email-masked]>

(I like that we're playing this game now. If we get
a bunch of these off the table before B-A, that may
allow us better use the f2f time.)

Here's another one to consider and maybe say "no."

DKIM-signing domains sometimes use partner companies to
e.g. send out marketing crap or userful materials. That
can be done in various ways but using lurk for DKIM-signing
without giving the partner a DKIM private key for my domain
could be yet another use.

I suspect that it'd be considered OTT to use such an
interface for DKIM-signing, but who knows?

Cheers,
S.

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html