Hallam-Baker, Phillip:
> I think it is entirely likely that bigbank.com would have a situation
> where the mail servers for its east coast offices were adding
> signatures but the ones for the west coast were not. The part that is
> less easy to see is whether there is value to the short term fix. It
> is probably easier to just do the deployment.
> But it is not certain that this will be the case.
Wietse:
> > This hypothetical bank can use the hypothetical "I sign some
> > of my mail" policy until the DKIM roll-out is complete, and
> > then transition to the "I sign all my mail" policy.
> >
> > A per-user mechanism is not the obvious solution for this problem.
Hallam-Baker, Phillip:
> What is the difference on the recipient side between 'I sign no
> mail' and 'I sign some mail'?
I understand that "I sign some of my mail" is equivalent to not
expressing a signing policy at all, and therefore redundant. I
don't understand the purpose of 'I sign no mail', but I suspect
that it is just as useless as "I sign some".
> The only policy that has use to a recipient is to know that every
> message without exception is signed. Otherwise there is no utility
> in the policy record.
Agreed.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
