On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:58 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) <[email protected]> wrote: > Suresh, notwithstanding what some vendors might wish in terms of > reputation, the case for ADSP is and always has been to leverage DKIM to > be able to say "this domain signs all mail" in one way or another.
That seems like an overly complex, rube goldbergish way to indicate it. More like developing spf, with your sole reason being to publish "v=spf1 -all" indicating that a domain never sends email. And it is still not something I would trust without confirmation and verification out of band (this, having noticed more than one wrong spf declaration that if we'd bothered to check on in our mailserver, would have resulted in lost mail) Further, at least from my perspective, it is not something I would bother to check for all but a few significant domains. --srs _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
