Subject: DOC-BUG (possibly TECH-OMISSION): ietf-marid-core section 5

From: "william(at)elan.net" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:19:51 -0700 (PDT)

In section 5.1 "Neutral or None or PermError" the statement is

"An SMTP server receiving one of these results SHOULD NOT reject the
 message for this reason along, but MAY subject the message to
 heightened scrutiny by other anti-spam measures"

I object to using term "other anti-spam measures", this implies that
MARID CORE itself described an anti-spam measure where as the purpose
of MARID WG is not to create anti-spam mechanism but to fight the
problem of phishing which is a result of insecurity in current email
infrastructure.

I recommend changing the sentence to just "by other measures" or
possibly to "by other email security measures"

Simularly to above in section 5.4 it has the same statement:

"An SMTP server receiving this result SHOULD NOT reject the message
 for this reason along, but MAY subject the message to heightened 
 scrutiny by other anti-spam measures"

I have same objection and recomendation as with 5.1. Also since
the statements in 5.1 and 5.4 are basicly the same, it might
be easier to combine these sections leaving as separate paragraph
about difference of SoftFail, i.e. change to something like:

  5.1 Neutral, None, PermError or SoftFail 

      An SMTP server receiving one of these results SHOULD NOT reject the
      message for this reason along, but MAY subject the message to
      heightened scrutiny by other email security measures, and MAY
      reject the message as a result of this heightened scrutiny.

      Such additional security measures may take into account that 
      message for which the result is "SoftFail" is less likely to be 
      authentic that message for which the result is "Neutral".

---
William Leibzon, Elan Networks:
 mailto: [email-masked]
Anti-Spam Research Worksite:
 http://www.elan.net/~william/asrg/

---

From: "Jim Lyon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:39:32 -0700

I concur with William's requests, but don't think that these alone
constitute a reason for another version of the draft.  Should a revision
occur, I'll be happy to incorporate William's suggestions. 

-- Jim Lyon

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of william(at)elan.net
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 12:20 AM
To: IETF MARID WG
Subject: DOC-BUG (possibly TECH-OMISSION): ietf-marid-core section 5

      An SMTP server receiving one of these results SHOULD NOT reject
the
      message for this reason along, but MAY subject the message to
      heightened scrutiny by other email security measures, and MAY
      reject the message as a result of this heightened scrutiny.

---