-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 3:12 PM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-02 review
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Dave CROCKER <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
wrote:
On 9/13/2010 7:19 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
If a domain publishing ADSP discardable has not gotten control of their
mailstreams then all I can say is "Darwin was right".
I agree with you completely.
The problem is that customers of a receiving ISP often do /not/ agree
with you.
When their ISP discards mail the customer wanted, the explanation "well,
it's
what the author told me to do" typically does not work. And since the
customer's contact is with the receiving ISP, it is the receiving ISP
that must
alter their activity.
I'm not convinced this is entirely true. We often get queries from our
clients who get queries from their subscribers asking what happened to
the email they were expecting. In other words, the questions are being
initially directed to the Author, not the recipient's ISP, about the
missing email.
So the exchange is more likely to be:
1) message sent with restrictive policies
2) message bounces/is discarded
3) recipient feels unloved, asks Author why?
4) Author looks at logs and sees message was delivered, asks recipient
to ask their ISP why
5) recipient asks ISP why
6) recipient gets an answer from ISP (really?)
Jeff,
Are you telling us that your clients are sending mail through your systems
using ADSP=discardable? If not, what are the restrictive policies indicated in
item "1)"?
For item "3)", can you indicate generally the nature of the mails involved? Are
these transactional? marketing? Where's the love?
Just trying to understand.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html