> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:dkim-ops- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Hector Santos > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 9:58 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [dkim-ops] hammering with a soldering iron, was subdomain > vs. cousin domain > > No Murray. But perhaps someone should be because the responsibility is > now once again shifted from the passive 3rd party signer back to the > visible 1st party 8222.From equal d= domain transaction. As far as > the potential millions of potential receivers are concern, the Author > Domain is once again responsible for signing the message.
And rightly so, in this scenario. But even if it's a visible third-party delegation, now the From: is associated with a third-party and a bad signature. Are you saying that's better? If so, based on what? > Worst, when the signature fails, the wrong domain brand and unknown > reputation scoring across receivers is negatively hurt. That would be a poor implementation. A failed signature is supposed to be treated as no signature. _______________________________________________ dkim-ops mailing list [email protected] http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-ops
