ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Is anyone using ADSP? - bit more data from the receiving side

2009-10-14 13:38:51
You do realize that this just give people ammunition to throw the book 
at anyone for violating IETF standards.  Its a fact, they would be 
violating a IETF standard if they break mail knowing FULL well there 
is an technology specifically designed to protected against such abuse.

If a ISP or anyone is intentionally violating an RFC and pushing back 
into broken mail into the network that can potentially harm a domain 
or end-users, they are no doubt putting themselves at risk and any 
smart high tech lawyer would be licking his chops if the VENDOR is a 
big buck organization.

Why continue with this nonsense contentious issue when the solution is 
simple:

    1) Respect RFC 5617
    2) Update it to support resigners
    3) Or get rid of it.

This on-going idea that it can exist but IGNORED is not a good idea 
and is bound to bite people in the butt.

--


Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: iane(_at_)sussex(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk 
[mailto:iane(_at_)sussex(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:53 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; John R. Levine; Daniel Black
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Is anyone using ADSP? - bit more data from the
receiving side

Another data point: Google Mail won't use ADSP because they will not
discard someone's mail outright without a written agreement from the
sending domain agreeing to same, absolving them of responsibility for
mail that never arrives.
You mean that they won't publish ADSP records? Or that they won't
respect
any ADSP records? Or that they won't discard "discardable" messages?

They won't honour ADSP "dkim=discardable" records posted by others.

Logically, none of these things follow. Publishing ADSP records doesn't
mean that Google will discard anything, though it does grant permission
for
others to do so. They have lots of other things that they can do as a
result of ADSP fails. Presumably, they'd be more aggressive with
quarantining mail if there's an ADSP record that renders a specific
email
discardable. Heck, they could even argue that publication of
"dkim=discardable" does absolve them.

I'm only relaying what I was told at a conference.  You're free to contact 
them for an explanation beyond what I've said.

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


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

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