ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for draft-levine-dbr-00(fwd)

2010-06-24 12:11:03
On 06/24/2010 09:28 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
On Jun 24, 2010, at 9:21 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:

Any service that doesn't have an *explicit* guarantee from the mail
domain itself that it signs all mail is worse than incompetent,
it's harmful. A third party can *never* prove the negative that the
domain in question doesn't have sources of unsigned mail that they
don't want discarded. The domain in question without a thorough
audit probably doesn't have a clue itself if it's even vaguely
largeish.

So why does a domain that performs that painful audit and
remediation need to then tell John's drop list that it's OK to
drop unsigned mail? It doesn't. It can just publish an ADSP
record and be done with it. No need to count on some unreliable,
unaccountable point of failure to mediate their business.

Why do you keep assuming that John's proof-of-concept drop list is the only 
way a drop list can ever operate?

So what is incorrect about what I wrote?

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

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