ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Discussion of Consensus check: Domain ExistenceCheck

2008-06-11 16:48:17

On Jun 11, 2008, at 3:35 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:

Douglas Otis wrote:

It seems ADSP should also suspend efforts in how to validate a  
domain and move this to a separate draft.

STD 13 will do for existence, and when folks prefer a more  
elaborated 2821bis check, the poll will tell us to adopt John's  
proposal (some variant of MAY).  The idea is again to avoid  
pointless checks when receivers already have a better 2821bis  
"nomailfqdn" result.

Disagree.  Portions of John's draft should be moved to a separate SMTP  
related draft.  As it is now, John's draft will modify SMTP  
interoperability and, as such, these sections specific to the email- 
address domain should not be included within the ADSP draft.  For ADSP  
to avoid these interoperability issues, such as those related to RFC  
2606, MS Exchange, NNTP, MUAs, et cetera, only the existence of an  
ADSP record should be determined.  ADSP should avoid introducing  
requirements related specifically to the email-address domain.  The  
ADSP record is even located at a different domain.  Checks made  
against the email-address domain necessitates additional transactions  
which are functionally independent of ADSP anyway.  Email-address  
domain transactions and their related status should be defined within  
a separate draft, where sufficient time, testing, and appropriate  
vetting is allowed to occur by an SMTP WG.  After all, the goal is to  
finish the ADSP, ASAP.  : )

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

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