ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2010-07-29 15:18:36
On 07/29/2010 11:53 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
On Jul 29, 2010, at 5:09 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote:

--On 26 July 2010 18:24:34 +0200 "J.D. 
Falk"<jdfalk-lists(_at_)cybernothing(_dot_)org>  wrote:

I think it's because, when you implement most protocols, if your end is
broken then you can't even talk to the other end.  With ADSP, if your end
is broken then you can still talk SMTP and even sign with DKIM, but the
other end may silently discard your message.  There's no feedback.

About 90% of the email sent to my personal email address ends up in a Gmail 
junk mail folder, that I never check. There's no feedback there, either.

As far as SMTP is concerned, that mail was successfully delivered.

How is this different than border mta's that 500 the message or 200 and silently
discard? This happens billions of times every day and has been for more than
10 years. At least with ADSP, a FBL has a little bit more concrete reason of why
it did that.

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