[ietf-dkim] Nitpicking about ADSP
hsantos at santronics.com
Mon Mar 9 15:15:52 PDT 2009
John R. Levine wrote:
>> So, by ADSP's definitions, you don't sign with Author Signatures. That
>> doesn't mean it's "broken and useless".
> Even though I do in fact sign all my mail with valid DKIM signatures, I
> can't say that with ADSP. Perhaps there are people who consider that
> makes ADSP highly functional, but it seems an odd interpretation.
Geez John, you wrote this thing. Either you believe in it or not.
The current abstract says:
DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) defines a domain-level
authentication framework for email to permit verification of the
source and contents of messages. This document specifies an adjunct
mechanism to aid in assessing messages that do not contain a DKIM
signature for the domain used in the author's address. It defines a
record that can advertise whether a domain signs its outgoing mail,
and how other hosts can access that record.
it further says one in section 3.3. of the possible results are:
o All messages from this domain are signed with an Author Signature
and discardable, i.e., if a message arrives without a valid
Author Signature, the domain encourages the recipient(s) to
You clearly wrote in section 4.2.1:
discardable All mail from the domain is signed with an Author
Signature. Furthermore, if a message arrives
without a valid Author Signature due to modification
in transit, submission via a path without access to
a signing key, or any other reason, the domain
encourages the recipient(s) to discard it.
Again it is repeated that the mail is "DISCARDED" when this policy is
Is this not want you wrote? Did you believe in it?
Is there something missing in your statement?
More information about the ietf-dkim