example.com MARID 10.2.1.2/24 smtp.example.com
ACCRED=class3.bondsman.com
I do NOT want to discuss syntax.
The syntax is irrelevant, and in any case if we have our own record
the protocol syntax could be different.
But I do want to emphasize the major benefit of having a way for
the sending domain to suggest reputation services (plural, please)
for the receiving MTA (or MUA, for that matter) to check.
Plural is definitely better.
Please understand, there CANNOT be a single reputation
service which serves all needs.
Agreed, the undertakings that one might hold a small enterprise to
would be very different to those you could reasonably hold an ISP to.
Thus, there will need to be a negotiation process to find
a reputation
service acceptable to both receiver and sender (if such a
thing exists).
I don't think we need to get into 'negotiation' in the sense of
a multi-trip protocol. The negotiation in this case is all or
nothing. The sender is not going to get an additional accreditation
on the fly if a single mail message does not get through. But
the sender would probably get another accreditation if lots of
mail was not getting through.
I believe there is consensus here that reputation services will be
necessary (or, at least, inevitable); but that we don't want to touch
the issue of how they would operate. For all I care, they could be a
web-cam showing the entrails of some recently-sacrificed animal for
do-it-yourself divination. ;^)
I would regard reputation as one possible type of accreditation but
there are others.