On Oct 10, 2009, at 12:43 PM, hector wrote:
John Levine wrote:
In article <4AD0A77D(_dot_)4000406(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com> you write:
On 10/09/2009 11:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
People who contribute to mailing lists shouldn't say dkim=all. We
argued this ad nauseam when we were hammering out ADSP, it
shouldn't
come as a surprise to anyone.
That is not true at all. They shouldn't be using discardable.
"All" only
says what the sender does, not what the receiver should expect.
They certainly shouldn't be using discardable. I would advise not
using
all either, due to the observed tendency of people to pay way too
much
attention to DKIM and ADSP failures.
So overall, you are in favor in deprecating RFC 5617?
My position is now is to agree with you IFF the modus operandi is to
allow for resigners with no mandate or recommendation to use RFC 5617.
If this is the recommendation, then we need to get rid of it or fine
tune the specification to spell out the issues with receivers who
begin to support it.
It's potentially of value to a subset of senders. That subset does
not include any sender who sends mail to a third party mailing list.
That subset of senders is probably strictly a subset of bulk mailers.
Whether the real value to them is worth the complexity for recipients
is a whole other question, but anyone concerned about the problems
with sending mail from ADSP using domains through third party
mailing lists is way off in the weeds.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html