ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2008-05-07 13:01:56

On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 19:54 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dave Crocker:


Arvel Hathcock wrote:
I propose that the side advocating removal of the NXDOMAIN check agree 
to language which makes this step AT LEAST a SHOULD and preferably a MUST.


Having the ADSP specification include normative text that calls for 
validating 
the From field domain name does two things:

1. Couples an entirely separate and more generally useful mechanism 
(checking 
domain name validity) to one that is considerably more limited (ADSP).

2. Modifies SMTP.  (Yes, really.)

Having non-normative text that describes it serves to promote the idea but 
not 
couple it with the fate of ADSP.

Instead of discussing how many angels fit on a pinhead, I suggest
that we do something sensible, like: ADSP is bound to DNS, and
therefore it's defined only for author domains that exist in DNS.

+1

-- 
:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118
:: www.e-dialog.com

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Jeff Macdonald <=