this was pointed to just now by JP I think -- http://blog.russnelson.com/opensource/domainkeys-vs-dkim-knockdown.html --
wow, this is so wrong, and making a fight out of nothing. nevertheless I'll rise to Russ' troll. doh I'm an idiot! ;) 'DKIM is doing to DK what Sender ID did to SPF' bullshit. Sender ID (a) pulled bullshit patents out of its ass, refused aggressively to license them to open source implementors, and (b) attempted to "embrace and extend" by deliberately co-opting the DNS records from under SPF so that SPF would collapse. DKIM and DK sigs are, by contrast, entirely complementary; you can sign and check both together, in the same domain, hell even the same RFC822 message, if you want! The only difference is that implementors, proposers and standardisers alike have all agreed to go ahead with DKIM, since it appears more likely to be standardisable. *BIG* diff from the Sender-ID situation, and suggesting it's similar is *very* misleading. --j.
