Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-02 review

["McDowell, Brett" <[e-mail]>]

On Sep 13, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:

>  On 9/13/10 1:03 PM, McDowell, Brett wrote:
>> The ADSP=discardable deployer is not conveying apathy regarding the deliverability of their mail, quite the opposite IMO.  They are saying (to paraphrase) "please attempt to verify the DKIM signature on this message against the key record in our DNS for this domain/subdomain, and if you cannot verify the signature then please discard the message as a means of protecting your subscriber from phishing attacks, otherwise please deliver the message and do so knowing we put this much effort into ensuring the goodness of the mail before we sent it"
> For MLMs making modifications that invalidate DKIM signatures, posting 
> should be blocked for domains making an ADSP dkim=discardable 
> assertion.  Such an assertion might cause other subscribers to refuse 
> messages from an Author Domain with the discardable assertion and cause 
> delivery and message queuing to be problematic.  Otherwise, those 
> refusing these messages run a risk of being unsubscribed.

That would be an undesired outcome and therefore a "reject" by the MLM would be more appropriate (until we have a RFC in place and adopted that enables the "transient trust"/"chain of trust" notion I've been advocating for).  And yes, I'm going to write one but perhaps only after I work with more mailbox providers to implement the notion now.  

> 
> -Doug
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html