[ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for draft-levine-dbr-00 (fwd)
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
Tue Jun 22 11:40:21 PDT 2010
adsp is an assertion by a sender. John's list is a reputation of the sender's adsp assertions (WAG)
On Jun 22, 2010, at 2:29 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 06/22/2010 11:07 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:28 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
>>> On 06/22/2010 09:46 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
>>>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 1:00 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>>>>> As threatened, here's an I-D that says how one would publish a list of
>>>>> domains for which it makes sense to discard unsigned mail.
>>>> Looks like a good start, and almost shockingly simple. Any MTA/MFA support yet? *grin*
>>> I still don't get why it's ok for John Levine to publish a list which
>>> says that it's ok to discard unsigned mail from paypal.com, but st00pid
>>> for paypal.com to publish the same thing. That is the essence of his
>>> jihad against adsp.
>> Because presumably verifiers will trust John's process for compiling this list more than they'd trust any random schmoe with the ability to create TXT records.
>> (If paypal were representative of all domains, this wouldn't be a concern.)
> Well that's pretty ironic because paypal.com is listed in his database
> as being discardable even after he got done telling them they were incompetent
> for setting their ADSP record to discardable since they mix users and transactional
> mail all in the same sub domain. So it seems that John isn't any more competent
> than paypal.com by his own competency test.
>> Personally, I think we'll need lists like this for a while in order to gain more experience and determine best practices, and THEN we can decide whether to change (or even scrap) ADSP to reflect those practices.
> Who watches the watcher?
> I'm very dubious that John can do that without explict bidirectional human correspondence.
> Which is no different than paypal.com publishing their ADSP record since
> the people who put up the ADSP record are extremely likely to be the same people
> telling John's list that they want to be set to discardable. What the value add for
> the middle man is here -- besides faithfully copying errors -- is a mystery.
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
More information about the ietf-dkim