The sender of the message does not get to insist that the message be accepted.
The owner of the domain does get to state that legitimate messages are signed
and to insist that it is extreemly likely that messages without authentication
headers are forgeries intended to defraud the recipient.
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 12:56 PM
To: John Levine
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] The basic problem with SSP
John Levine wrote:
2. I don't care about the breakage and I'd prefer you
reject unsigned mail.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the fundamental
question here
is why should the recipient care what the sender claims he prefers?
Anytime you send e-mail to someone, you're basically asking
them to do
you a large favor by investing the effort to accept and deliver it.
Senders don't get to set rules about what recipients can do.
or will do or should do.
bang on, John!
discussion on the list continues to use a perspective that
sounds like the sender gets to dictate things, rather than
that the receiver has the option of using information.
at every turn we should start by asking how a feature will
benefit the receive-side and what our basis is for believing
that they will *see* that benefit (and hence be motivated to use it)?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
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