On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:19:05 +0100, MH Michael Hammer (5304) <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree that if a signing domain publishes discardable then the MLM > should discard it. Let's apply a little logic here. The types of > mailstreams that have been identified as being suitable candidates for > ADSP discardable have always been ones that would not be appropriate > (bank notifications, etc) for passing through MLMs in the first place. > While an ecard might be sent to all the members of a list, this is > enough of a corner case that if the domain publishes discardable then > that message should be discarded even though it would otherwise be > legitimate. > > If a domain publishing ADSP discardable has not gotten control of their > mailstreams then all I can say is "Darwin was right". Darwin was indeed right. But an organism that is not fit to survive may struggle on for millions of years before it finally becomes extinct. Agreed that domains that asserts discardable SHOULD should have separate non-discardable mailstreams more suited to MLMs. But what incentive do they have to make this change? So far just some "advice" in Murray's draft. Yes, eventually they will all do it right, but "eventually" can be an awful long time. In the meantime, MLMs will have to cope. -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: [email protected] snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5 _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
