Hector Santos wrote:
Being stranded is the result of SMTP having achieved its goal of
allowing delivery without requiring any prior arrangements. Shouldn't
it now be duty bound to bring them out of there?
AFAIK, the only attempt toward that in
- 'DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Development, Deployment and
<draft-ietf-dkim-deployment-09.txt> as an Informational RFC
where it mentions a case ``in which the receiving site might wish to
deliver problematic mail, rather than redirecting it, but also of
course contacting the signing organization, seeking resolution of the
Do RFCs contain more invitations to get out of the strand?
If you are referring to "stranded" as a result of complexity, this
particular DKIM document is probably a good example of keeping them in
I'm not sure whether it is the complexity of DKIM --or the mail
system as a whole, for that matter-- that refrains postmasters from
participating to discussions. Which discussions? Let me try and
enumerate their types, AFAIK:
* IETF or IRTF related mailing lists,
* tool-specific *-user mailing lists,
* technique-specific *-discuss mailing list,
* DNSBL or rfc-compliance web sites,
* provider-specific feedback-loop web sites,
* generic web sites that also discuss mail issues.
It seems a lot of places. However, is the total number of
subscribers comparable to, say, 25,665,515 (the "Total domains
checked" on spf-all.com today)? I'd guess the percentage of "active"
postmaster is around 1~4%, and the rest is stranded "inertial mass."