ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Domain Existence Check and Erroneous Abstract

2008-06-06 03:28:43
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:41:34 +0100, Douglas Otis 
<dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org>  
wrote:

On Jun 5, 2008, at 4:23 AM, Charles Lindsey wrote:

Then please could you provide us with a full example that could
actually happen, starting from an X.400 email that somehow got
tranformed into an RFC 2822 object that contained unresolvable
domains, and which yet managed to acquire a DKIM signature (not
necessarily by anything in the From header) and was also capable of
being replied to by its recipient.

If such a beast can exist, then we need to take note of it, but i am
not aware that it could exist.

Many companies use MS Exchange rather than normal SMTP servers.  MS
Exchange permits creation of mail addresses unreachable by SMTP, since
these domains may only exist through an internal X.400 assignment.
While some companies find this a desirable feature, it is often a PITA
for users of this service.  While a parent domain may wish to assert
ADSP practices, MS Exchange related email sub-domains can be created
for various purposes without publishing _any_ record within DNS.  The
MUA will therefore receive a mixture of SMTP and MS Exchange messages,
but this would only create a problem with specific domains for users
of the MS Exchange service.

Will you please answer the question I asked, which was for an example of  
an actual message and how it would appear at various stages as it passed  
through a mail system from the point where it was originated (and  
hopefully signed) to the point where it needed to be verified.

I have no idea what MS Exchange does, and after reading your gobbledegook  
I am still no wiser.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131                       
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>