On Jun 9, 2008, at 8:55 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Monday 09 June 2008 20:11, Frank Ellermann wrote:
John Levine wrote:
change the SHOULD [check MX & A/AAAA] to a MAY. With
that change, I'm happy with the text John proposes.
OK by me.
Hm, it is a border case, why not just say "MUST either
check [2821bis] or as minimal approximation [nxdomain]".
If you really like MAY better I think "MAY instead" is
clearer than only "MUST [nxdomain], and MAY [2821bis]".
If 2821bis is only a MAY you can't rename the result to
"nomailfqdn", it has to stay as is (= "nxdomain"), and
we can close that part of #1579, "not more applicable".
I'd like to suggest that since the how seems to be controversial we
punt on
that and just say the ADSP only applies to domains that exist. I
think we
perhaps we can leave how to determine this as an implementation
detail. The
last 1% of agreement/interoperability isn't worth it.
That's an interoperability problem. If senders don't know what
recipients may check, then the ADSP check is ill-defined.
It does not really matter what the check is, as long as it's
well defined.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html