[ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist

[Dave Crocker]

Sorry for being confused, but I now can't tell whether the focus is on an 
NXDomain for the _adsp.<domain> string that is queried for ADSP, or the <domain> 
name to which it is associated.

These are separate queries.

d/

Wietse Venema wrote:
> Frank Ellermann:
>> <robert at barclayfamily.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Would it be better if "error" were a specifically defined
>>> result in addition to "unknown" / "all" / "discardable"?
>> The fourth bullet in chapter 3.2 "ASP results" offers "the
>> domain does not exist" after "unknown"/"all"/"discardable".
>>
>> I-D.kucherawy-sender-auth-header chapter 2.4.2 "ASP results"
>> lists this as "nxdomain".  IMHO good enough, or do you have
>> something else in mind ?  Let's s/ASP/ADSP/g + WGLC, s.v.p.
> 
> Sounds reasonable. I expect many will implement NXDOMAIN as a
> fourth ADSP lookup result in some way or another. 
> 
> This explains more easily than my earlier claim (an NXDOMAIN result
> cannot correspond with one of "unknown" / "all" / "discardable").
> 
> 	Wietse
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
> 

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net