-----Original Message-----
From: HLS [mailto:sant9442(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of hector
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 10:30 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: iane(_at_)sussex(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk; Daniel Black;
ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Is anyone using ADSP? - bit more data from the
receiving side
You do realize that this just give people ammunition to throw the book
at anyone for violating IETF standards.
I have completely missed your logic, I'm afraid. No, I don't realize this at
all.
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.
What exactly would the penalty be for Google Mail choosing not to apply ADSP,
which is 0% mandatory?
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.
What mail would they be pushing back into the network?
If Google Mail wishes to put itself at risk (and I disagree they're doing so),
isn't that their choice? If it's really such an atrocious decision, won't the
users go someplace safer, or won't industry apply pressure for them to come
around?
Why continue with this nonsense contentious issue
+1 to that bit, especially all this senseless intensity.
when the solution is
simple:
1) Respect RFC 5617
2) Update it to support resigners
3) Or get rid of it.
Sorry, I don't agree that these are the only options. How about a different
proposal, orthogonal to ADSP, covering lists and forwarders? How about
proposing extensions to ADSP that cover the areas you feel aren't covered?
How about something, anything, that seeks to encourage co-operation rather than
friction?
This on-going idea that it can exist but IGNORED is not a good idea
and is bound to bite people in the butt.
Oh, I can list a pretty large number of mail-related RFCs, some of them
standards track, that are not universally implemented and the world hasn't
blown up yet.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html