Arvel Hathcock wrote:
This is where we are at present on the NXDOMAIN issue I believe but
others might have a different view.
That's my impression, as well.
What's the path towards settling this?
I propose that the side advocating maintaining the NXDOMAIN check as an
actual algorithmic step agree to remove this from the algorithm
description in favor of placement somewhere else.
I'd be happy with this if I knew where the "somewhere else" is. If
there was a domain existence check somewhere else that we could
reference, that's worth discussing. But I know of no such reference.
The other question is what the existence check should consist of: check
for an NXDOMAIN response or check for MX/A/AAAA which more precisely
defines mail domains?
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html