On Jun 13, 2008, at 1:17 AM, Charles Lindsey wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:06:57 +0100, Douglas Otis <dotis(_at_)mail-
abuse.org>
wrote:
Which TLDs should be ignored? Imposing SMTP domain requirements will
likely reveal a need to make many exceptions. Do you agree there
should be a means for making exceptions? Whether making address
assignments exclusively within MS Exchange is considered stupid (and
you'll find agreement there), imposing a requirement that email-
addresses must be valid (in some manner) changes SMTP
interoperability. As it is now, recipients will normally see these
messages (which may not expect a response), and might even be
considered an alternative to the use of "do-not-reply@" local-parts.
You may ignore any TLD not recognized by ICANN (for that purpose, all
national TLDs are deemed so recognized).
The domains being ignored can _not_ be based upon it not having a
valid TLD. This would permit bad actors a means to employ look-alike
spoofing. Their spoofs might use ACE-labels for example, or things
like ".C0M".
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html