Hmmm,
I would like author: responsible for the message content
Originator: MTA that first handles the author's message
Operator: Subsequent MTA's handling before final delivery
Thanks,
Bill Oxley
Messaging Engineer
Cox Communications, Inc.
Alpharetta GA
404-847-6397
bill(_dot_)oxley(_at_)cox(_dot_)com
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 8:52 PM
To: DKIM IETF WG
Subject: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator
Folks,
I keep prattling on about the ambiguity of the term 'sender'. For
example, take
a look at the somewhat astonishing Table 1 in
<http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_8-4/anti
-spam_efforts.html>
Every entry refers to a sender.
Although important in lots of email discussions, it is particularly
problematic
to be vague with the term 'sender' when the discussion is specifically
about
responsibility.
It has been pointed out that such ranting is more productive when there
is
replacement terminology being offered.
After some offline discussions, I would like to suggest two, simple
words, that
capture sufficient distinction to be useful. We could devise a more
extensive
and nuanced list, but as I say, the goal is to be useful:
Originator: Responsible for the content of a
message.
Operator: Performs one or more message transfer
steps for the message.
Some will note the slight echo of X.400, for the first term. One needs
to take
note that the core technical work in formulating the UA/MTA model,
including the
terminology, had lots of Arpanet folk in it...
Thoughts?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html