On 8/9/10 6:17 AM, Hector Santos wrote:
If the MLM follows the other guidelines which amounts to prohibiting
restrictive ADSP domains from subscribing and submitting list mail,
then the MLM would not dependent on remote receivers behaving in a
SMTP level rejection mode since any rejection at this point would not
be related to ADSP issue but a typical member delivery issue as it is
today.
This is important in my view because MTAs direction has been more and
more toward using dynamic SMTP level rejections.
An MTA that has shifted towards a DATA rejection would now have to
have DKIM/ADSP exception to issue a false positive acceptance for the
purpose of discard - that means tricky SOFTWARE/INTEGRATION change.
So if the MLM simply follow the guideline to prohibit strict ADSP
domain mail from entering its list environment, the downlink
non-delivery ADSP problems would not be an issue anymore - no
dependency on how downlinks are behaving and have no control over.
+1
IMHO, the ADSP assertion "discardable" where messages are silently
discarded may come to represent a bad practice.
The draft should not offer this type of guidance. Preventing
distribution of these domain's submissions, where the list might damage
the Author Domain Signature, better retains email's integrity and
provides a comprehensive solution for the problem this damage might cause.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html