I would suggest we deprecate i= and add st= (if not already used) that would let the sender specify a stream category. It would be limited to say 20 (or so) chars and we could specify a set of standard words (but not limited to). I'm thinking of things like transactional, marketing, password-reminder, sub-confirmation, billing, corporate, personal,...
It would be left to the receiver to use them or not of course. I understand some of these words could be abused, but then the receiver could build a confidence factor in domain/stream association, etc... With IPv6 we may loose IP reputation, this is a way to bring it back within DKIM. PS: http://postmaster.facebook.com/outbound gives a good idea of streams in IPv4 world with DKIM equivalent, but they may be about the only ones to do that with DKIM. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rolf E. Sonneveld" <[email protected]> To: "Franck Martin" <[email protected]> Cc: "Jim Fenton" <[email protected]>, "IETF DKIM WG" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, 2 April, 2011 8:14:45 AM Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= tag/value) On 4/1/11 1:31 AM, Franck Martin wrote: > I had the feeling that Y! was using the local part of i= to do > differentiation in reputation. ie various streams within the same domain. > > I know the spec intent recommends, different domains for different streams, > but then.... > > Intuition would tell me, that few people are willing (or understand) to have > different domains for different streams. +1. And as DKIM d= information already is shown to end users by some UA implementations (e.g. Gmail shows 'this message was signed by <domain>, when clicking on details) the need/advise to use different domains for different streams conflicts with the threat of phishers registering look-alike domains. /rolf _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
