ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?

2007-12-07 09:22:16
On Friday 07 December 2007 10:55, Dave Crocker wrote:
Michael Thomas wrote:
That mail abuse is such an extreme problem is probably the only reason
we would consider such a mechanism, but we need to be careful that we do
not use it to entirely disenfranchise possibly legitimate mail senders.

I assume you know what the meaning of "disenfranchise" is as you've
chosen to use it twice now. A legitimate user of my domain name is
exactly who I say is legitimate. There is no vote to be had on that
issue, and as such no vote to be taken away. Do you seriously dispute
that?

Your perspective asserts certainties that we already know do not apply.

My point is exactly that SSP will be operating in a context of significant
uncertainty, yet it's design model really assumes differently.


I guess that's a yes.

If you believe that any random MTA has an equal right to emit mail claiming to 
be from my domain, then I think there's little left to discuss.  I totally 
and completely understand why you think SSP is a bad idea.

Mike's point is the key one.  His point is right one.  From your perspective 
then, I guess there's no phishing problem because anyone is equally 
legitimate for sending from any domain.  

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