Subject: [ietf-dkim] Adding a 'consultants' page to dkim.org

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 10:27:39 -0700

Folks,

G'day.

I am periodically getting a request for detailed assistance with DKIM software 
development or deployment and operations details.  These are not things I 
personally do, so I'm adding a web page to point at.  It needs entries...

As with the other dkim pages, listings are not endorsements.  Entries are added 
as provided and as is.  It is intended merely as a place to guide specialized 
research.

Please send me entries to add of yourself or anyone else you think should be 
listed.  (A suggestion to list someone else is not cited, so you don't need to 
worry about being credited/blamed for the suggestion.  Again, this isn't about 
"recommendations".)

The proposed format of an entry is:

    Consultant or Company name:

    Type of services:

    Email:

    Phone:

    Geographic coverage:

Should I have other information on the form?

Thanks?

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:51:02 +0100

Hello Dave,

What you might wish to do is to create a DKIM user group email list & ask 
people to post their questions on there.
Let the community answer operational/implementation questions - there are 
always good samaritains around.
Kind regards,

O.

-- 
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D.
E-mail:<[email-masked]> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

---

From: "Daniel Taharlev" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:59:54 +0000

Would you folks use a DKIM wiki? I some times find it to be a better method than forums. Let me know and I can set one up.

[email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <[email-masked]>

Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:51:02 
To: Dave CROCKER<[email-masked]>; DKIM IETF WG<[email-masked]>; Interop<[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Adding a 'consultants' page to dkim.org

Hello Dave,

O.

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 08:34:24 -0700

> Would you folks use a DKIM wiki? I some times find it to be a better method than forums. Let me know and I can set one up.

I think of a wiki as being best for joint development of a document rather than 
for discussion.

The idea, here, was for discussion which might or might not result in a snippet 
of text that has community consensus.

Do others see this differently?

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 08:37:45 -0700

> always good samaritains around.

My reaction is similar, but a bit different.  The benefit of "water cooler" 
consulting is enormous and typically skims quite a lot of common and simple 
problems off the top.  This leaves the work of hired consultants to problems of 
more substance.  Hence, the consulting styles overlaps nicely.

I'll add a dkim-users mailing list to the dkim.org mix shortly.  At this point, 
the real question is how to help someone coming to the web page to figure out 
what mailing lists to use and how...

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:08:23 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Dotzero wrote:
> It would be nice to be able to refer them to a consultants list through 
> dkim.org.

I'm leaning toward objecting to that idea.  I'm concerned that listing 
consultants on dkim.org could be construed as some kind of endorsement of 
those listed.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:49:52 -0700

> consultants on dkim.org could be construed as some kind of endorsement of 

I think the concern is entirely valid.  But rather than take the concern as a 
reason to prohibit any listing, I think the challenge is to protect against that 
unfortunate complication.  In other words, I think the potential benefit 
warrants finding a balance.

The other line of rationale is that the page has already crossed the line, with:

      Software and Services Deployment
      <http://dkim.org/deploy>

So really -- to use one of my favorite cliche's -- we are just haggling about 
price...

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:53:08 -0700

Jim Fenton wrote:
> If you mean a wiki that isn't openly editable, then it's just a convenient
> tool for creating the consultants' webpages.  Dave might choose to use wiki
> software to maintain this, or not.

Oh.  Interesting idea.  Hadn't thought of it.

In terms of the 'work' of building the list, it sounds reasonable.  However I 
think it inherently requires having editability be open, which has the downside 
you observe.

So I could easily imagine folks signing up for a discussion list and having a 
wiki open to subscribers.  Maybe for the DKIM FAQ?  But probably not for a 
simple listing of consultants?  (hmmm.  Unless there is an associated discussion 
list they would sign up for, beforehand?)

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:57:44 -0700 (PDT)

>     Software and Services Deployment

[404]

> So really -- to use one of my favorite cliche's -- we are just haggling 
> about price...

Ah, true.

The link off the main page is entitled "Organizations Providing Software, 
Hardware or Services".  The word "Services" (at least to me) includes 
consulting.  So do we want to include consulting services in this list, or 
make a separate list and (hopefully) adjust the title of the first?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:04:22 -0700 (PDT)

[Is this really appropriate for ietf-dkim?]

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Dotzero wrote:
> I appreciate your concerns Murray because there is currently a limited 
> universe of folks I would personally consider (FWIW) consultant caliber. 
> On the other hand I'm somewhat a believer in Caveat Emptor. Given that 
> there is a demand out there, if not dkim.org then where will (should) 
> people turn? google search?

It of course also brings up the question of reputation.  If we end up 
listing a bunch of consultants whose work leaves something to be desired, 
dkim.org won't be considered a good source of such information...

Talk about eating our own dog food!
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Jim Fenton <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:38:28 -0700

Daniel,

If you mean an openly-editable wiki, the potential for wikispam (as has
been seen on some IETF wikis in the past) and other abuse might make the
management of the wiki more onerous than just posting the information,
as Dave has offered to do.

If you mean a wiki that isn't openly editable, then it's just a
convenient tool for creating the consultants' webpages.  Dave might
choose to use wiki software to maintain this, or not.

-Jim

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:26:40 -0700

Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> The link off the main page is entitled "Organizations Providing 
> Software, Hardware or Services".  The word "Services" (at least to me) 
> includes consulting.  So do we want to include consulting services in 
> this list, or make a separate list and (hopefully) adjust the title of 
> the first?

Mumble.  Fair question but probably instead calls for changing the existing 
'services' term.

The intent for that existing page is about "products".  "Services" means online 
services, as in service providers.  I think something like "region" is a good 
indication that the "consulting' entries have a basic difference.

(And in case I didn't mumble loud enough:  Foo!)

 > [Is this really appropriate for ietf-dkim?]

I couldn't decide on exactly the right venue, which is why I chose 2.  The 
Interop list is great, but I thought it too limited a distribution for 
discussing this larger question.

 > dkim.org won't be considered a good source of such information...

I view this as more a matter of percentages.  No list is perfect.  Is this list 
still a good idea if 10% of the listings are for consultants who perform poorly? 
  I would think so?  What about 50%?  75? 90?  I don't know where the cut-off is.

Basically, my thought is to create the list, let it get populated, let it get 
used, and see how useful folks feel it is.  At some point, I fully expect a 
sense of rough consensus, one way or the other.

 > Talk about eating our own dog food!

Well, it's true that this might be a dog of an idea...

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:21:08 -0700

Folks,

> people to post their questions on there.

I'd like to clarify the role of a new 'users' list from the DKIM lists that 
already exist.  The existing ones are:

    Standardization

    Development

    Testing

    Operations

So who is the "use" one for and what will they discuss?  For example, how should 
it differ from discussion on the Operations one?

In general, we ought to clarify the roles of each of these lists.

Comments?

d/

ps.  I've added a listing of the lists under the

    <http://dkim.org#introduction>

section
-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> I'd like to clarify the role of a new 'users' list from the DKIM lists 
> that already exist.  The existing ones are:
>
>    Standardization

I'm guessing that's ietf-dkim.  Pretty self-explanatory; the list covers 
the standardization of DKIM and its adjunct proposals.

>    Testing

I assume this is dkim-dev and dkim-testers.  I think these two overlap 
enough that they should be merged.  It's for people who are developing, or 
have developed, DKIM applications so that they can benefit from the 
experience of others and arrange for interoperability testing.

>    Operations

Not sure which this one is (dkim-ops?).  I'd say this is the general list 
for questions about deployment and operations.  This is where I believe 
questions about reputation and multiple signatures should be discussed, 
except where those coversations relate directly to standardization or 
development/testing.

Are there other potential discussions that wouldn't be covered by these 
which warrant having their own venues?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:56:02 -0700

Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> I'm guessing that's ietf-dkim.  

yes.  (sorry I didn't provide the pointers.)

> 
>>    Development
>>
>>    Testing
> 
> I assume this is dkim-dev and dkim-testers.  

yes.

>   I think these two overlap 

These are independently managed lists.  Merging is possible, of course, but we 
should get some pretty strong consensus to do that, I think.

>>    Operations
> 
> Not sure which this one is (dkim-ops?).  

yes.

>   I'd say this is the general list 

Ewww. "reputation"?  No, I hope not.  For the moment, we are only talking about 
the mechanics of creating and interpreting DKIM signatures.

I would *very* strongly hope that discussion about the use of domain names for 
making quality assessments (reputation) would be on an entirely different list. 
  (And, yes, we might need to create one.)

Anyhow, is the ops list where the water-cooler self-help consulting should take 
place?

> which warrant having their own venues?

That's my question, yes.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:02:38 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> These are independently managed lists.  Merging is possible, of course, 
> but we should get some pretty strong consensus to do that, I think.

They remain ambiguous if not.  But anyway, there's my vote in the hopes of 
creating some consensus. :)

>>   I'd say this is the general list for questions about deployment and 
>> operations.  This is where I believe questions about reputation and 
>> multiple signatures should be discussed, except where those coversations 
>> relate directly to standardization or development/testing.
>
> Ewww. "reputation"?  No, I hope not.  For the moment, we are only 
> talking about the mechanics of creating and interpreting DKIM 
> signatures.

I'm referring mainly to general public questions about "How do I tie this 
to reputation?"  Not our industry debates; those go on MAAWG or IETF lists 
as they have been.

> Anyhow, is the ops list where the water-cooler self-help consulting 
> should take place?

That's what I believe, yes.

>> which warrant having their own venues?

I can't think of any.  If such did appear, separate venues could be 
created.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:32:08 -0700

Folks,

A consultants' page is now available at:

   <http://dkim.org/deploy/consult.htm>

with a pointer from the dkim.org home page.

Please circulate this notice and especially suggest anyone offering services 
send me a completed template form.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker