Re: Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

["John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>]

In article <3d84c686-aa5f-8180-8a37-be77fef949a8 () tnetconsulting net> you write:
> I would also configure MLMs to forward unknown bounces to the -owner. 
> Hopefully the -owner would then feed (a sanitized copy of) the unknown 
> bounce type the MLM maintainer(s) to improve said MLM.

I suppose that would make sense for the 0.1% of mailing lists run by
people with the skill and interest to hack on their list software.

> > It's a rathole, it doesn't scale, and it is not a bug that you can 
> > send mail to people who you don't already know.
>
> I wasn't aware that DKIM-ATPS necessitated needing to know who you were 
> going to send to.

ATPS was an experiment that failed.  Nobody uses it, it didn't scale.

> > If identities were a magic bullet, we'd all be signing with S/MIME.
>
> I am (and have been for years) a proponent of S/MIME.

I can't help but note the absence of S/MIME signatures on roughly 100%
of all of the messages in this thread.

> (I think we're still talking about how can an intermediate mail server 
> be authorized to be part of the SMTP end-to-end mail delivery chain. 
> Even if said intermediate mail server is downstream of the sender.)

Yeah, that's what ARC is intended to do.

R's,
John