[ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?

[Tony Finch]

On Thu, 1 May 2008, Jim Fenton wrote:
>
> This is one of the reasons the ADSP specification needs to define how
> this is done:  just saying "don't use it on non-existent domains" isn't
> precise enough.

I disagree that the ADSP spec should define valid mail domains. The SMTP
specification already defines them in section 5. There's no need for ADSP
to have a different specification for the same thing - in fact that would
be harmful. If you want to argue about what is and isn't a valid mail
domain, then get involved with the SMTP revision process: here is the
wrong place.

ADSP's current NXDOMAIN language is a particularly bad example of a
specification that disagrees with the SMTP spec, and it also seems
to be based on a misunderstanding of how the DNS works.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot at dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
TYNE DOGGER FISHER GERMAN BIGHT: SOUTHERLY 4 OR 5 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4.
MODERATE OR ROUGH DECREASING SLIGHT OR MODERATE. SHOWERS. MAINLY GOOD.