On 9/9/10 11:42 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Douglas Otis >> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 11:16 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [dkim-ops] subdomain vs. cousin domain (when deploying >> "discardable") >> >> On 9/9/10 9:51 AM, McDowell, Brett wrote: >>> Does everyone agree that this is the "best practice" for the use case >>> provided (ignoring I only gave you two namespace options)? >> Until more comprehensive policy becomes available, yes. >> >> In general, using a cousin domain is a bad practice, where the term >> "far" has not been met by your current practice. [...] > Are there any recorded data supporting that assertion? > We experienced an increase in phishing when our marketing department decided to use cousin domains to promote new products. This left us dealing with a greater number of complaints from users confused by what they had installed. Unfortunately, there is an entire industry devoted to taking advantage of user confusion.
-Doug _______________________________________________ dkim-ops mailing list [email protected] http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-ops
