On Jun 2, 2010, at 3:26 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
Recent experience suggests that they often don't.
Can you name someone with ADSP experience who doesn't understand what it
means?
Not to pick on you specifically, since there are multiple examples, but I'd
say that domains that publish dkim=discardable and who let their users
subscribe and send messages to mailing lists don't understand what their ADSP
is telling people.
I suppose it's possible they do know and they don't care how much damage they
cause to everyone else, but I'd rather think it was confusion than malice.
You'd call it malice to prioritize consumer protection over the a very small
population of employees being temporarily inconvenienced by having some of
their messages to mail lists delivered to SPAM and in some corner cases,
actually unsubscribed from lists... while we invest time and resources to (a)
assess how MTA's, MUA's and MLM's actually deal with these mail streams and (b)
work with the standards community to improve the ecosystem by shaving off the
rough edges we find?
Neither ignorance or malice, simply the will to be an early adopter of young
standards with proven consumer protection capabilities coming from a respected
source. Yes, we are learning by doing and we are contributing all of that back
to the community.
What surprises me is how our efforts have been received by the community who
produced these standards in the first place.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html