On 02/May/10 13:33, Douglas Otis wrote: > On 5/2/10 11:10 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: >>>> The opt-in mechanism, I'd say. There's no standardized way for >>>> subscribers' servers to learn about subscriptions. >>>> >>> Even if you consider that to be a problem, what could it possibly have >>> to do with DKIM? >>> >> Just that if there were a handshake between a list server and a new >> subscriber's MX, they could also agree upon ADSP forwarding, e.g. by >> whitelisting the list server. >> > To retain security, the sender's domain needs to assert domain specific > exceptions for "all" or "discard-able" ADSP policies.
That's false, under several acceptations of "security". /Necessity/ of such assertions only makes sense if "security" is meant to be the ability of a domain to restrict legitimate uses of its name, such as its users writing to mailing lists, or to their grandma's. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
