Re: [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]

[Andrew Newton]

On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:40 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: Oddly I think we are agreeing, so perhaps we're both going in the wrong way ;-)  I thought the point was to bound DKIM's capability.  On the other hand, one could imagine a strict requirement for domain assignment in some TLDs (perhaps this is already the case with .gov?).  Regardless, absent that level of authentication between the registrar and the domain "owner" you're left with reputation services... Actually, there are TLD registries that do have registration rules.  This is true of many ccTLDs and some of the sTLDs (sponsored TLDs).  But the vast majority of domain registrations are in TLDs that have no registration rules of the type being discussed here. To say: DKIM's ability to identify a domain owner is [also] bounded by whatever checks a registration authority imposes. could be read to mean some domain registration rules can be counted upon for this purpose.  Practically speaking, I don't think this is true at all. -andy

_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org