Re: Last Call: <draft-levine-herkula-oneclick-04.txt> (Signalling one-click functionality for list email headers) to Proposed Standard

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

>I think there is a better reason to use HTTP(S) rather then email.

Nothing personal, but for interop purposes, the opinions of ops people
at large mail systems matter a lot more than your opinion or mine.

>> told me that they will only do one-click on signed mail.  So senders
>> MUST sign it so they can, you know, interoperate.
>
>The draft fails to explain that this is *sender* obligation.

I'm having trouble imagining someone implementing this who doesn't
already know that senders put on the DKIM signatures, but I've
twiddled the language in the draft to make the DKIM MUST clearer.

>>> I would strongly suggest that there be a requirement to include an
>>> "Origin: mailto:<envelope-sender>" header ...

>I am not talking about mailers wanting or not wanting this.

Yes, that's clear.  Like I said, if there is a shred of evidence that
anyone would actually use this extra non-standard header, I'd be happy
to think about it.  Once again, this goal of this draft is to enable
people to interoperate, not to tell them how you or I think they
should run their systems.

R's,
John