Re: [dmarc-ietf] BATV

2022-04-17 Thread Douglas Foster
Your DKIM solution is a viable one for the A-R problem, and would also work for the other idea which triggered the suggestion. . >From an ideal standpoint, I would argue that stripping of prior A-R records should occur at every entry point (Unauthenticated SMTP, Authenticated SMTP, ActiveSync,

Re: [dmarc-ietf] BATV

2022-04-16 Thread John Levine
It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 5:35 AM Douglas Foster < >dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would like to see John Levine's BATV document revived from expired draft >> status >>

Re: [dmarc-ietf] BATV

2022-04-16 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 5:35 AM Douglas Foster < dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to see John Levine's BATV document revived from expired draft > status > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-levine-smtp-batv > > BATV is in use within the current mail stream, and

[dmarc-ietf] BATV

2022-04-16 Thread Douglas Foster
I would like to see John Levine's BATV document revived from expired draft status https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-levine-smtp-batv BATV is in use within the current mail stream, and one commercial product has cloned it to make a proprietary version of the same idea, so it is time to