> If an organization doesn't understand the implications of publishing > ADSP (or doing anything else for that matter) then the basic damage > done is to themselves and their users. Their domain, their problem.
I think that if you talk to ISPs whose customers call and ask why they didn't get the mail they were expecting, you will find that this assertion is mistaken. In practice, I expect that where a competent DbR and ADSP differ, the DbR would say to ignore the ADSP, they say it's discardable but they're wrong, not the other way around. Amazon is a fairly unusual case, signing everything (as far as I can tell) but not making any public assertions about it. >When random 3rd parties start publishing about domains that is a real >problem. If a random list publisher tells people to drop unsigned mail >by a particular domain - particularly in the absence of an ADSP record - >there is the possibility of them getting sued. This is a significantly >different case then something like SPAM and RBLs. Sigh. I wish people would refrain from giving legal advice in technical fora, particularly legal advice that, in the US at least, is obviously wrong. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
