ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Role of Sender header as signing domain

2006-12-07 07:55:14
On Thursday 07 December 2006 08:14, John Glube wrote:

Therefore, in simplistic terms:

The ESP is responsible to the Net to stop abuse
coming from its network.

The ESP is accountable to the Net to respond to
complaints of abuse coming from its network.

It is therefore appropriate in most cases that the
ESP is authorized to sign for mail sent from its
Network on behalf of its clients using the sender
header because the ESP is the responsible and
accountable party to the Net.

There has been a lot of discussion on the list in the last several months 
about the benifit/necessity of allowing domains to specify which 3rd party 
signers are authorized to sign for them.  I think that this proposal, which, 
IIRC, is listed in the SSP requirements as a tentative requirement, would 
solve the problem you are trying to solve without diluting the tie between 
SSP and the 2822.From which is pretty much the entire point of SSP.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html