ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Unacceptable

2008-02-12 10:39:42
Frank Ellermann wrote:
Douglas Otis wrote:

The assertion "discardable" will not resolve the declared problem without also increasing the chances email with invalid signatures of being discarded rather than rejected, or a DSN being generated,
even when the RFC 2821 FromMail is within the same domain.

The term is MAIL FROM (46 occurences in RFC 4408).  IMO "suspicious"
was better than "discardable".  The 2821bis terms for "discard" is
"drop", adding tons of caveats, without noting non-technical facts,
e.g., "dropping mail" can violate the "constitution" (or base law) where I live, and that is not on the same level as ordinary crimes.

If you (not you personally) really must invent a new term instead
of sticking to "suspicious" or simply FAIL (for auth-headers), how
about using "unacceptable" ?  This clearly indicates the receivers
already dropped the ball when they accepted any "unaccptable" mail.

+1

--
Sincerely

Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com


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