-----Original Message-----
From: John R. Levine [mailto:johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 4:21 PM
To: MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for
draft-levine-dbr-
00(fwd)
I don't recollect you proposing wording that included "silently" so
it
isn't even possible for a person going back and look at the
discussions
to know what you meant.
We are therefore left with what you wrote and which the working
group
came to a consensus on.
Whatever. I find it hard to see how anyone could interpret the RFC
and
the discussion leading up to it as a hidden consensus to send spam
every
time a receiver saw "dkim=discardable", but I'm clearly not going to
persuade you otherwise.
Folks should interpret the RFC how it is written.
For a failure on "discardable" the receiver is encouraged to discard the
message. Thus it is written thus it is interpreted.
By omission it is left to the receiver to decide whatever else they
might or might not do in conjunction with a decision to discard
messages. That is beyond the scope of what is written in RFC5617.
I did not say receivers MUST nor did I say receivers SHOULD, I said that
they COULD as one approach to the issue of making it clear that any
non-delivery is at the direction of the sending domain. A receiver might
choose to only do so for a financial domain such as Paypal.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html