ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?)

2008-05-01 16:59:10

On May 1, 2008, at 3:16 PM, Arvel Hathcock wrote:
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?

Needs to be NXDOMAIN I suspect to avoid the cry "You're retasking  
records for what they weren't meant to do."

When domain validity checks discover whether SMTP might be supported  
by the domain's DNS, MX and then A records could be queried without  
"retasking" their purpose.  Not looking for _positive_ confirmation of  
possible SMTP support means empty nodes could be considered "valid"  
domains, which is wrong, problematic from the standpoint of depending  
upon negative results that might overlook local resolutions, and of  
course wasted overhead.

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