A friend with a small local mail server that ONLY sent out good, legitimate mail was blocked by almost everyone for lack of an MX record. Old days are gone. thanks
Bill Oxley Messaging Engineer Cox Communications 404-847-6397 -----Original Message----- From: Hector Santos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:16 AM To: Douglas Otis Cc: Oxley, Bill (CCI-Atlanta); IETF DKIM WG Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] RE: I think we can punt the hard stuff as out ofscope. Douglas Otis wrote: > > A single policy record placed adjacent to the domain's MX record could > be sufficient. This would eliminate domain transversals or wildcard > search mechanisms. However, this approach creates a need to obsolete > the use of just A records as an SMTP server discovery/confirmation > method. Once an A record discovery/confirmation has been obsoleted, > then messages might not be accepted when the email-address domain is not > confirmed by the existence of an MX record. Doug, The MX/CNAME/A discovery process is long established process and part of the SMTP standard for millions of systems world wide, not just the Fortune 10, 500, 1000 or 10,000, and it includes legitimate systems with no MX records but with a CNAME or A record. And you want to change this long established methodology for SSP purposes? You're kidding right? -- Sincerely Hector Santos, CTO http://www.santronics.com http://santronics.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
