Not to add too much confusion, let us not forget that CAN SPAM uses the term "sender" solely for what is referred below as "author".
ESPs sometime consider themselves "senders" while their clients on behalf of whom they send are "mailers". >From CAN-SPAM: (16) SENDER. (A) IN GENERAL.Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term sender, when used with respect to a commercial electronic mail message, means a person who initiates such a message and whose product, service, or Internet web site is advertised or promoted by the message. (B) SEPARATE LINES OF BUSINESS OR DIVISIONS.If an entity operates through separate lines of business or divisions and holds itself out to the recipient throughout the message as that particular line of business or division rather than as the entity of which such line of business or division is a part, then the line of business or the division shall be treated as the sender of such message for purposes of this Act. -- Daniel T. Dreymann Co-Founder & SVP Product, Engineering & Operations Goodmail Systems, Inc. Mobile: 650.823.4268 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 09:08 To: Jeff Macdonald Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator Hmmm... >... I find it very easy to understand > things when talking about books. An author creates a book. A publisher > introduces the book to the world in a presentable format. A Bookstore > make the book available to the public. Using Bill's suggestion: > > email books > author author > originator publisher > operator bookstore I noted your earlier use of 'publisher' and it bothered me quite a bit. However I am warming to the model you describe. 1. It is an extremely well-established model. 2. It pertains to salient responsibilities in an information transfer sequence. (Given that multiple operators can be in a sequence, I'd suggest 'distributor' rather than 'bookstore'.) It scares me quite a bit to have my email operator be vested with apparent responsibility for the content of my email, but, alas, I guess that really is what the anti-abuse work is about. What do other folks think? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://bbiw.net> _______________________________________________ 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
