Dave Crocker wrote:
I believe the desire with checking the A record is similar to
the idea behind having ADSP in the first space.
I don't understand this, the I-D does not talk about A records.
Checking for the presence of an A record is intended to try
tell you something in the absence of an explicit action by
the domain owner. That's it's flaw: It is intuiting ADSP
information from non-ADSP action.
If that's about step 2 in chapter 4.2.2 of I-D.ietf-dkim-ssp-03,
that verifies the existence of the author domain by any query,
recommending MX for this purpose. If the author domain doesn't
exist the result is "error". It is one of the four results in
chapter 3.2 (no ADSP, all, discardable, nxdomain).
While there is nothing wrong with checking the A record, it's
semantics have literally nothing (directly) to do with ADSP.
If the author domain does not exist it cannot receive mail, as
there is no A, no AAAA, and no MX, among others. That check is
not directly related to ADSP, it generally makes sense, maybe
it should be done as first step. Is that the "new issue" here ?
Related: Apparently the I-D does not mention domain literals.
I think it should say something, domain literal isn't nxdomain.
Frank
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html