>> Even with your discardable adsp setting, it becomes a >> matter of the order of checks at the receiver's gate (eg, whitelist >first, then adsp...) > >But since mailbox providers already manage reputation at scale, how much >of a burden is adding this bit to the mix? Remember this only affects >mailbox providers who have decided to do DKIM blocking based on ADSP >discardable policies (for some, if not all senders).
You appear to be asking recipients to distinguish among legit directly sent paypal transaction mail, legit paypal mail that comes through known-to-be-real mailing lists, and any other paypal mail that is presumably illegitimate. This is a huge burden, since you're asking every mail system in the world to distinguish between legit list mail and legit other mail, something they don't have to do if they just deliver mail which has a good reputation. Since you're describing two mailstreams, directly sent paypal transaction mail and list relayed individual mail, why wouldn't it be a better idea and less work (for everyone other than paypal at least), to separate those two streams so the recipients don't have to guess which messages belong to which ones? Free bonus: if you move the individual mail out of the transaction stream, if you are able to recognize list mail, you instantly know that any paypal.com mail arriving from a list has a problem. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
