--- Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So in your view, what is the accountability entity for a message sent to > you, the MUA/MSA/MTA that signed the message or the MTA that sent you > the message if they aren't the same?
One definition of accountability might be; which party is best able to stop the traffic if you don't want it. Is stopping the traffic at a forwarder as useful as stopping the traffic at its source? I think a well-behaved forwarder is effectively transparent in the responsibility chain as they are solely acting on the instructions of the final recipient. In a sense, they are about as responsible as your LDA. Another definition of accountability might be; who should I sue over the traffic? Again, is it as useful to sue the forwarder or is the originator the party you really want to take to court? Given that forwarders do not create content I would categorize them as competent or incompetent rather than responsible or not responsible. Mark. _______________________________________________ ietf-dkim mailing list http://dkim.org
