On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:03 AM, SM wrote:
The receiver might read it as "sender doesn't care whether the mail
gets delivered".
Agreed. Steve Atkins also opined this assertion _does not_ offer a
solution addressed in RFC 5016 requirements draft in section 3.2. The
"Signing Complete" assertion recommended was silent on diminished
handling of DSNs. Handling transactional messages in a "discard"
fashion hides possible protocol issue.
The SSP draft could recommend the use of RFC 3464, with examples
specific to DKIM signature failures. Any diminished handling of DSNs
may also be predicated upon when RFC 2821 MailFrom is not within the
RFC 2822 From/DKIM domain. This could assist high profile domains
deal with DSN messages, without also handling backscatter purportedly
from other domains.
Would it be possible to include the "Signing Complete" assertion?
What would be the drawback in allowing this type of assertion?
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html