----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Levine" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, 4 April, 2011 4:09:16 PM > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Removal of AUID (i= tag/value) > >Another way is to have a dkim tag that specify the header that > >indicates the stream classification > > >Many ways to kill the same bird. > > If there is a reason why people aren't able to use a d= domain per > stream, I wish someone would explain in simple terms that even a > dimwit like me can understand. > > The only arguments I'm aware of is that hostile or incompetent DNS > managers refuse to install key records, which isn't a very good reason > to add cruft to a standard and "I want to do it some other way" which > is even worse. > you can lead a horse to water....
I'm curious of the reasons too, I see some data points, but cannot conclude any statistics... May be from the people who do statistics on DKIM, do you see a fair percentage of DKIM signed sub-domains? _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
