On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:13:38 +0100, Douglas Otis
<dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org>
wrote:
On Jun 20, 2008, at 4:18 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Charles Lindsey wrote:
I would suggest all that is needed in the present draft is a
statement that the existence check MAY be omitted in the case of
TLDs that are known not to exist in the global DNS system,
I guess I'm not seeing any support for this, so if folks do want to
include it, then they ought say so. Otherwise, I think this thread
should be done,
... Should we follow Charles advice
and add "Please review RFC2606 partial list and be aware some other
email-address domains may not exist within DNS, where not having DNS
entries or by bridging protocols into SMTP may place those messages in
peril."
But that is NOT what Charles is advising. I am merely suggesting that
Verifiers MAY omit the existence check for reasons of that nature. That
leaves the door open to specify something more specific in the future.
If we leave it as it is (MUST do that check - always) then a few cases
such as you have described may fail to get through. Since you are the one
worrying about those cases, it is your problem. Persomally I could live
with it either way.
As our chair has pointed out, nobody else seems to share your particular
concerns.
--
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