On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:38:18PM -0500, Sean Leonard wrote:
> > In my experience, people who write mail software understand the opaque
> > mailbox rule, and try pretty hard to follow it. Some cheat and do case
> > folding to match Bob@domain to BOB@domain, but I can't think of any that
> > match bob+foo@domain or b.ob@domain to bob@domain, other than the MTA that
> > actually knows what the addresses mean.
>
> Gmail does not recognize dots as distinguishable characters within usernames
> (mailboxes).
>
> That would be a 500+ million mailbox software example...
That's for *their own* domain, the text you're replying to refers
to general address processing that would apply to other people's
domains (such as an MUA looking for keys might need to find the
keys for variant addresses).
So the questions are:
* All other things being equal, would domain owners be better off
serving the keys via DNS.
* How important is the lack of support for variant addresses?
Is it actually a problem if email to variant address forms
(de-novo email, rather than replies to mail from the canonical
form of the address) is sent in the clear for lack of (automatically
discoverable) keys?
If the first answer is "yes" and the second is "no", then DNS is
a clear winner. Otherwise, there are trade-offs to consider.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
