Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Alexey Melnikov wrote:
I am still trying to get my head around this, but I am thinking that
defining a new ESMTP capability for "I provide authentication services
and strip bogus Authentication-Results header fields" would be a half
hour job, so why not do that?
My concern isn't that writing the draft is hard. I'm more concerned
with the fact that getting MTA adoption of such a thing will take longer
than just saying the header should be DKIM-signed such that the MUA can
verify it's valid (or one of the other solutions that doesn't touch
other components).
+1. And getting standards approval will introduce additional day, typically no
less than one year, and more typically 2-3. Yeah, this could be short. Could
be.
The task of writing a simple spec is almost never the interesting part of
creating a successful Internet protocol.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html