[ietf-dkim] Issue 1579: ADSP result set, New issue: ADSP status codes

[John Levine]

>1: One new issue (trivial unless we forget it), fix the *FWS

I agree that in retrospect, DKIM should have used WSP rather than FWS
in the DNS records.  But it says FWS, existing code really does FWS,
and it makes sense to me for ADSP to be consistent.

>2: Two old issues, "discardable" + status code.  The latter
>   is simple, a reference to RFC 5248 and a recommendation 
>   what receivers are supposed to do when they reject ADSP-
>   "discardable" mail.

Mission creep.  DKIM and ADSP don't say anything about SMTP sessions.
They are equally applicable if mail is delivered by being spooled onto
a thumb drive and delivered by courier.

>3: One major issue, "discardable" without in depth discussion
>   of "false positive" wrt Resent-* scenarios is a show stopper
>   for ADSP, it could delete legit 2822upd Resent-messages.

Huh?  There's an unlimited number of reasonable message
transformations that can break DKIM signatures.  Why does this one
require special discussion while, say, recoding MIME parts from base64
to QP doesn't?

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.