--- Scott Kitterman <ietf-dkim(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> wrote:
So in your view, what is the accountability entity for a message sent to
you, the MUA/MSA/MTA that signed the message or the MTA that sent you
the message if they aren't the same?
One definition of accountability might be; which party is best able to stop the
traffic if you don't want it.
Is stopping the traffic at a forwarder as useful as stopping the traffic at its
source?
I think a well-behaved forwarder is effectively transparent in the
responsibility chain as they are solely acting on the instructions of the final
recipient. In a sense, they are about as responsible as your LDA.
Another definition of accountability might be; who should I sue over the
traffic? Again, is it as useful to sue the forwarder or is the originator the
party you really want to take to court?
Given that forwarders do not create content I would categorize them as
competent or incompetent rather than responsible or not responsible.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org