--- Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Frankly all this discussion about let's go get the guy that signed the > message makes me really wonder why I would ever want to sign a message. > Back to my hobby horse of the week for a moment, unless you offer a > benifit to the sender, they won't sign. To me being able to protect my > domain name in a deterministic way would be a benifit potentially worth > taking some risk for. Getting on a whitelist or being subject to some > third party proprietary reputation vodoo doesn't get my blood moving.
Well, maybe it should. You see, the voodoo is already in place and frankly it doesn't work all that well. Our goal is to get rid of it! There are two simple factors here. One is a mechanism by which only you can represent your domain. The second is a mechanism by which you (or others) can make positive assurances about traffic from your domain. I think DKIM provides the former and I can think of any number of ways in which you could make provision for the latter - many of which haven't been invented yet. Mark. _______________________________________________ ietf-dkim mailing list http://dkim.org
