On Feb 8, 2012, at 8:29 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On 08/Feb/12 15:26, Steve Atkins wrote:
>>
>> 8.1 talks about sending unsolicited reports of authentication
>> failure while 9.1 states that unsolicited reports of authentication
>> failure MUST NOT be sent.
>
> No, 8.1 talks about sending unsolicited abuse reports.
"Such criteria might include direct complaint
submissions from MUAs, reports triggered by mail sent to "spam
trap" or "honeypot" addresses, reports of authentication
failures, and virus reports."
That's talking about "reports of authentication failure".
s/reports of authentication failures,// is the obvious fix.
>
>> 8.6 implies that the d= domain is always a good place to send an
>> unsolicited report if it leads to a deliverable email address. Is
>> that what we mean to say?
>
> No. A "reasonable candidate" implies a few attempts can be done.
I'm not sure what you mean there.
8.6 fairly strongly implies that the only reason that a DKIM d= might
not be an appropriate place to notify is if the d= is being used to
distinguish reputation streams. That's only one of several reasons
it may not be a reasonable candidate.
>
> We are unable to order the candidate destinations described in 4 and 6
> according to some criteria.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
