Barry Leiba <barryle...@computer.org> Tue, 01 August 2023 18:40 UTC
As someone who has, as an AD, questioned the publication of such background documents, even in working groups I chartered, I can give a related opinion about this one: I do think the background is important to publish separately for this work, however easy the problem is to describe. I think it's important that those interested have access to the problem description, reasons that it wasn't solved in the original DKIM specification -- It's because "replay" is a bogus concept and was discussed and rejected long ago. There is no solution. "Replay" is just a normal consequence of the email architecture. This is just a plea for absolution by senders to send spam with impunity under the cover of IETF blessing. If you don't want a bad reputation for spam, don't sign spam. It's really that simple. The "replay" problem is a feature, not a bug. DKIM is working as intended. I have no sympathy for spam senders. Why should anybody else? Why are we trying to accommodate sites that send spam? Why are we paying attention to spam sending sites and their whining about getting penalized? Spend some money on your spam filters instead of trying to lobby for a legislative fix to push the problem onto others. There is far too much financial interest going on here at the expense of ordinary users of email and the profiteers in the industry and their consultants. Don't send spam. Spend your money figuring that out. Problem solved. Mike
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
