On 06/11/2010 10:49 PM, John R. Levine wrote: >>>> ... So if we clarify that the recommended practice is to "silently >>>> >>> discard" (as some have described it), won't we have solved this >>> particularly problematic work flow? >>> >>> You're right, then it just falls back to mail mysteriously disappearing. >>> >>> >> why can't the MLM send bounce back to sender's mail-from address? >> > The MLM can't tell the difference between a rejection due to the recipient > address being invalid and due to ADSP. Rejecting due to ADSP is probably > wrong due to the spec, but sending mail to a list from a domain publishing > ADSP discardable is definitely wrong, so apportion the blame as you wish. > > >> John's response seems to imply that it is sender's responsibility not to >> send to lists in first place (if they use discardable). But can we be sure >> this will happen? >> > Of course not. That's an example of the reason that I don't find ADSP > useful (as opposed to manually vetted discard lists.) There's no way to > tell whether the party publishing discardable understands what they're > saying. >
And likewise there is no way to tell whether the party implementing discard lists understand what they're doing. IMHO, we should stay away from assuming the presence or absence of a given level of expertise of the mail admins on this earth. /rolf _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
