ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-08.txt

2007-01-25 15:59:28
On Thursday 25 January 2007 17:19, Eric Allman wrote:
--On January 20, 2007 3:59:33 AM +0100 Frank Ellermann

- 6.3
  "SHOULD NOT reject" because that "could cause severe
  interoperability problems" is plain nonsense.  Accepting
  mail tagged as "suspicious" will cause severe problems
  because tagged mail will be most likely deleted without
  further checks later.  OTOH "reject" is a clean decision
  at the border MX.

I think this one requires further discussion before I can change it.
This has been in pretty much since the beginning, and it's come up in
discussions several times, and so far as I can recall you're the
first one to disagree with it.  That could be because no one has
thought about it before, or could be because the WG feels it should
remain as-is.

I'm glad Frank brought this up.  I think he is completely correct.  Reject 
gives clear feedback to the sender.  Filtering into never reviewed spam 
buckets or even dropping mail does cause severe interoperability problems on 
an ongoing basis.  Let's not have more of it.

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