----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Otis" <dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org>
This system needs to be fair and effective when applied within an
environment occupied by a massive number of compromised systems.
This is once again attempting to devise a scheme where the consumer
of email services must pray their provider protects their domain, but
who will be clueless when they don't. Message replay abuse? Not the
provider's problem.
I doubt that an email service, who values customer service and PR as much as
the next service, will not disclose a TOS or inform users the change in
policies. In fact, with immediate SSP notification, it will provide
legally friendly satisfication of user expectations. There might be risk
for the email server who do not perform an SSP only which might cause user
mail to be later rejected or worst lost. For this very reason alone, it
would be prudent that Email Services perform an SSP check at the point of
entry and more important, provide a TOS and notices at the point of entry.
I remain unconvinced that most, if not, significant majority, Email
Services, especially commercial ones, will not be interested in protecting
their service from unrestricted domain abuse.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org