On May 8, 2011, at 11:16 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Franck Martin [mailto:fmartin(_at_)linkedin(_dot_)com]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 9:12 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-08.txt
"such as a signing and author subdomain {DKIM 12}" -> "such as a signing
and author subdomain {DKIM 12} or a totally different domain"
I'm on the fence on this one. Does anyone else have an opinion?
It is a best practice document so the full realm of possibilities should
be included.
It doesn't make general sense to list all possibilities in something that's
supposed to espouse a best practice. Although you're right that it could be
any domain, I think the best practice when it comes to creating mail streams
is the subdomain option.
Agreed, that seems to be the best currently-deployed practice.
Do you have some specific text you want to propose here? I couldn't
imagine any based on this comment.
Yes it is hard, because we don't want to endorse any product/service. Let
me try.
"Some MTA senders and receivers can enter in bilateral agreements or via a
third party to receive out of band reports on failed signatures."
That's true, but is it advice specific to the MLM environment? And is 5.2
the right place to talk about this?
It'd fit nicely into a separate BCP on handling signature failures -- perhaps
after there's more widespread operational experience with
draft-ietf-dkim-reporting?
5.3 postmaster should inform their users that messages are likely to be
discarded if sent via a MLM.
Is this inbound or outbound? I assume inbound given the title of the
section. But again I couldn't concoct text in my head to match your
remark. Can you propose some?
I thinking outbound. As this document is to give postmasters a quick
start, then it is good to mention if you choose ADSP, there is "no way"
the message can go via a mailing list and survive. I thought it was
possible before reading this RFC that you could tweak a MLM in a manner
that ADSP would not break, but I realize while possible it is absolutely
impractical and as you say a cooperating MLM better drop the message out
front.
What I'm worried is that it does not set a mindset with other email
policies that can be created.
I think it's safer to let the MLM operator decide, since that person knows
whether or not the list software will tend to break signatures on messages it
re-sends.
Or if they don't know, this will encourage them to find out.
--
J.D. Falk
the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html