Murray,
I'd be really concerned about drinking from this particular firehose, and
most especially the law of unintended consequences.
Maybe rather than proposing a change, it might be more productive to
talk through what the problem actually is? I'm not convinced that random
reports from potentially untrustworthy outsiders is what's wanted here.
Mike
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
This time with feeling! (and the attachment)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:13:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Murray S. Kucherawy <msk(_at_)sendmail(_dot_)com>
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address
At MAAWG someone pointed out that a sender might be interested in
knowing when his/her domain is being abused, i.e. if something appears
to be Suspicious.
In line with this and having talked to Jim about it, attached is some
proposed amended text versus the ssp-01 draft which adds an optional
reporting address to be used when the SSP algorithm results in
something being labeled Suspicious.
I intend to come up with a subsequent draft that has two purposes:
a) add something similar to DKIM key records;
b) define a format for such reports (i.e. ARF or something similar)
Comments welcome.
--
Murray S. Kucherawy =========================================
msk(_at_)sendmail(_dot_)com
Principal Engineer Sendmail, Inc. Emeryville,
CA, USA
(510) 594-5400
http://www.sendmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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