[ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious"
hsantos at santronics.com
Sun Dec 16 10:56:41 PST 2007
Dave Crocker wrote:
> Jon Callas wrote:
>>> Dave Crocker wrote:
>>>> With the use of language like "suspicious", SSP is making value
>>>> judgement on messages that do not satisfy SSP's criteria, even
>>>> though those message well might be entirely legitimate.
>> How about something like "SSP Exception"? Metaphorically, it works
>> well with the programming use of the word exception.
> In the hope of trying to close some of the "easy" Issues, would folks
> comment on this specific proposal, or otherwise post comments seeking
> closure of the Issue?
I actually thought Jon was joking around.
With all due respect to Jon, an exception is generally used when you
don't have any real controls over your software or system faults. Its a
highly debated concept that can create its own unknown exceptions.
"SSP Exception" makes you think of what it means. Is it a "Fault?"
Exception to what? SSP policy? Algorithm? Or we talking about the
domain taking "exception" to the idea someone is messing around with its
mail?. "I take exception to Mr. Bad Guy trying to exploit my mail?"
or that the domain screwed up and had created a Exception.
I don't particularly like Suspicious, but it is specific and much more
to the point and closer to the negative "classification" ideas we are
trying to attach, and what is being conveyed - that something is wrong.
And IMO, it can be understood by a much more wider audience than just
Hector Santos, CTO
More information about the ietf-dkim