On Sep 13, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Douglas Otis wrote: > On 9/13/10 1:03 PM, McDowell, Brett wrote: >> The ADSP=discardable deployer is not conveying apathy regarding the >> deliverability of their mail, quite the opposite IMO. They are saying (to >> paraphrase) "please attempt to verify the DKIM signature on this message >> against the key record in our DNS for this domain/subdomain, and if you >> cannot verify the signature then please discard the message as a means of >> protecting your subscriber from phishing attacks, otherwise please deliver >> the message and do so knowing we put this much effort into ensuring the >> goodness of the mail before we sent it" > For MLMs making modifications that invalidate DKIM signatures, posting > should be blocked for domains making an ADSP dkim=discardable > assertion. Such an assertion might cause other subscribers to refuse > messages from an Author Domain with the discardable assertion and cause > delivery and message queuing to be problematic. Otherwise, those > refusing these messages run a risk of being unsubscribed.
That would be an undesired outcome and therefore a "reject" by the MLM would be more appropriate (until we have a RFC in place and adopted that enables the "transient trust"/"chain of trust" notion I've been advocating for). And yes, I'm going to write one but perhaps only after I work with more mailbox providers to implement the notion now. > > -Doug > _______________________________________________ > NOTE WELL: This list operates according to > http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
