> On Jul 7, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 7/7/2017 1:33 PM, Seth Blank wrote: >> Receivers know the selector. If they feed domain and selector into >> their >> Bayesian processors and get a useful distinction, they are going to >> use it. >> No RFC will change that. If there's some statistically significant >> difference >> in 'sources' identified that way, then that's their call. >> Agreed 100% > > This was a hot topic when DKIM first came out. It represents a failure to > use or understand the role of selectors properly. The reputation /should/ > rely only on the domain name /without/ the selector, so the selector can be > used only for administrative purposes, such as rolling over to a new key. > > Note, for example, that including the selector in the reputation analysis > means that the history of the actor is lost when a new selector is used.
That a particular major ISP uses (or claims to use, or used to claim to use) selectors to identify particular senders is (or was, or was and continues to be) a major reason that some ESPs refuse to rotate keys at all. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
