On 4/29/10 6:06 PM, "John Levine" <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com> scribbled:
For non-obvious reasons it would be easier to do it the other way.
Make corp come from a subdomain and change the policy there and
keep transactional as paypal.com.
Sure, so long as the domains are different, although I would suggest
that for branding reasons it probably would not be a good idea to tell
people that unsigned mail from subdomains of paypal.com is OK. Use
x.com or one of the hundred of other domains paypal has.
Almost thousands, but yes, I can see that. The practice of changing
it would be almost impossible. But that's ebay's problem, not the
internets.
I just don't see how you can simultaneously say "throw away unsigned
mail" and "don't throw away unsigned mail if a list says it used to be
signed" unless you have some way to identify trustworthy lists. But
once you know that a list is trustworthy, why wouldn't you just accept
all its mail? I just don't see a plausible scenario where you you
know you trust the list but still want to accept or reject mail based
on assertions the list itself makes.
I don't think I've ever asserted anything about mailing list behavior.
I think Brett may have, but I have not.
I think that if we say we want our email thrown away if it isn't signed
(or broken signatures which I think we all agree is the same) and
mail goes through a mailing list and breaks it, then throwing
that away is a reasonable action and I wouldn't complain. VPs have,
but again, when our policies impact our deliverability I'm not sure
how that is the internet's problem. Plus John, haven't you always
said that once the mail gets to you, you get to make the choices
not us? :)
-Jot
--
Jot Powers jpowers(_at_)paypal(_dot_)com
480-221-1157 skype:jotebay
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html