[ietf-dkim] Issue: Deployment Guide Section 6.1/6.5 (ADSP/Forwader) conflict
dhc at dcrocker.net
Sun Oct 18 18:22:20 PDT 2009
Barry Leiba wrote:
> I suggest that ADSP-compliant mailing lists should be
> advised to reject "discardable" messages whether or not they will be
> breaking the signature.
Yes, this is a reasonable idea.
The question is whether it is the /right/ idea.
Another reasonable idea is that the mailing list should ignore ADSP, since ADSP
is really meant for final recipients; note that ADSP only comes into play for
recipients who support it. (Well, that is at least one model.) And there are no
doubt lots of other reasonable ideas.
At this stage, I believe rightness depends entirely on market preferences. Do
we have any empirical data of ADSP use which experiences the problem being
covered here, resolves it in the way being suggested, and garners receiver support?
Absent any of that, this discussion is purely academic.
Each proposal like this is expensive. It takes time to discussion, run through
the process, test, deploy and use. We should let private experiments determine
the preferred handling, before we seek to standardize a solution.
Particularly since we seem to have only and exactly one market-based
organization experiencing the problem.
More information about the ietf-dkim