John Levine wrote:
<t hangText="Note: "> The results from DNS queries that are
intended to validate a domain name unavoidably approximate
the set of Author Domains that can appear in legitimate email.
I'd like to suggest that we use a different word than "approximate" in
the above discussion and in the Levine draft.
FWIW, I'm not thrilled with my suggestion either.
I wasn't thrilled by "approximate", but I couldn't think of a word
that more accurately captured what I was trying to say.
"Approximate" may give the impression that the error may be in
either direction, ...
Depending on local configurations, there might be. My MTA is set up
so that it recognizes domains for local hackery that aren't visible in
the DNS. I realize this is out of the scope of 2821, but my thought
was that there's nothing short of trying to deliver the mail and
seeing what bounces to accurately tell what's valid.
Surely we don't need to capture local hacks in the draft.
I suppose that "overapproximate" would be OK within the constraints of
2821.
I can definitely live with "approximate". I don't think
"overapproximate" is even a word, or if it is, it may mean something
else so let's avoid that one.
-Jim
|
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html