In article <3d84c686-aa5f-8180-8a37-be77fef94...@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
