Hector Santos:
> >>2. I don't care about the breakage and I'd prefer you
> >> reject unsigned mail.
> >
> > Not to put too fine a point on it, but the fundamental question here
> > is why should the recipient care what the sender claims he prefers?
> >
> > Anytime you send e-mail to someone, you're basically asking them to do
> > you a large favor by investing the effort to accept and deliver it.
> > Senders don't get to set rules about what recipients can do.
>
> If thats the case, than explain why should receivers should bother
> processing DKIM signature mail?
The purpose of a valid DKIM signature is to identify the party that
signed the message. Whether this is a first-party or third-party
signature is largely irrelevant. It's about accountability.
> SSP to me is about Failure and Non-Compliance of the DKIM-BASE signature
> process - an AUTHORIZATION concept. Mail that passes the test is still
> untrusted and can be further processed using traditional AVS tools.
It is a mistake to believe that you have any control over what
recipients do with their email. It is the persistence in this
mistaken belief that distracts from the potential that DKIM has.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
