On Aug 4, 2006, at 11:03 AM, John L wrote:
"SIGN ALL MAIL" and "DO NOT USE ANY SERVICES KNOWN TO DAMAGE THEIR
SIGNATURES"
Cisco may wish to only state:
"SIGN ALL MAIL"
The important difference is whether the assertion is _expected_ to
cover all possible sources carrying their messages.
The more important difference is that recipients can do something
based on the first statement but not on the second.
Imagine that policy takes the form of a list that can either be
declared as partial or complete. In the case of a partial list,
although that information will not aid the blocking of messages
outright, it can still serve to clarify genuine relationships between
the From email-address domain and the signing domain when they
differ. A partial list indicates that recipients should consider the
reputation of the signing domain instead of blocking messages when
this relationship is not established. On the other hand, a complete
list indicates that recipients need not consider the reputation of
the signing domain and can blocking messages when the relationship is
not established. Although a complete list offers greater utility,
for general use a complete list is not very practical assertion for
most domains.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
