-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 10:22 AM
To: Ian Eiloart
Cc: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-02 review
I really don't know why people who should know better are clinging onto
this
nostalgic notion that SMTP-time isn't the right (only) place to do
scanning,
Given that I'm currently a strong believer in domain reputation being a big
part of the future, I've asked that question internally here, and I'm told in
return that people believe the cost incurred by switching to end-of-DATA
filtering vs. connect-time filtering is a lot larger than I believe. And they
[claim to] have the data to support that position from large customers, so for
now I'm not arguing it.
but there is a layer violation issue with MLM's. Unless you have a MLM
that
is completely purpose-built with SMTP, or has bits and pieces of itself
inserted into
milter-like parts of the SMTP stream, your average MTA is going to have
no clue whether it's destined for a MLM or anything else.
Those points might well encourage future MLMs to be implemented with much
tighter MTA integration, but if so, we can be sure there will always be the
legacy stuff hanging around as drag.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html