On Sep 14, 2010, at 9:31 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:ietf-dkim- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of John R. Levine >> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 9:18 AM >> To: Ian Eiloart >> Cc: DKIM >> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-02 review >> >>> There are all sorts of reasons for publishing ADSP=discarable, from > "the >>> domain isn't used to send email" (analagous to "spf -all") >> >> Quite right, in which case I hope you'll agree that throwing mail away > is >> exactly the right thing to do. >> >>> to "our domain is widely spoofed (because of its sensitive nature), > and >>> we absolutely do sign all our email". >> >> That would be dkim=all, not dkim=discardable. >> >> As I keep saying over and over, discardable really means discardable: > if >> in doubt, throw it away. It does NOT, repeat NOT, mean high value > mail. >> It means low value mail. >> > > -1 > > It does not mean low value mail and I don't think you will find a > sending mplementing dkim=discardable that would agree with you. In the > case of the domain actually sending mail, what is being said is that the > risk of phishing/badness/abuse is great enough that when in doubt, > discard it if it fails to validate or does not have a signature. This is > significantly different than "it means low value mail". > > Mike
I agree with Mike's assessment. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
