Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:17:12 -0500
From: johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com
But if you already have enough data to make a decision about a message's
disposition in that case, you also have enough data to make a decision
about that message's disposition regardless of any SSP policy that
anyone might express.
Right. That's another reason that "strict" is a bad idea, because it
gives senders the unwarranted impression that they control (or even
affect) things that we know they don't.
I suspect that the group of senders who think they can somehow mandate
how a receiver treats their mail already have the belief independent of
SSP, but I agree that the current wording of the document gives the
impression that it is mandating a use of the data rather than just
providing information and it could be clearer about that fact (the
existence of the handling tags doesn't help here). To clarify this
point a little more it is not even the sender who would be making this
assertion, but the domain owner.
Assuming we can make it clear that the domain owner's role is simply to
provide information and that receivers will make use of that
information or not however they decide it best serves their users then
I still think this is a good policy to be expressible.
So the question in this case really comes down to whether the policy we
are discussing (or any particular SSP statement) is useful, or at least
non-harmful, when you are evaluating a message for which your existing
? policies do not provide a completely efficacious decision algorithm.
Right again. That's where I say that statements about things about which
the sender has actual knowledge (e.g., "I sign everything") are far more
likely to be useful than statements about things that they don't.
I have got to disagree here. I think most cases where domain owners are
likely to be able to make a "strict" assertion that information is
likely to be extremely helpful. And if someone makes that assertion
erroneously and I don't have enough information to make a decision
independent of SSP and the mail is transmitted via someone who I don't
trust to sign messages on behalf of others then it seems really
unlikely that
I'm going to miss that mail.
Robert
_________________________________________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your
"fix".
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html