On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:31 AM, Arvel Hathcock wrote:
> I don't think it's really sunk in as to how small the set of senders
> who will find this useful is, or how disruptive it will be if you
> accidentally set it when it doesn't apply to you.
From my perspective, the number needn't be small at all. Small
organizations with their own mail processing infrastructure can
with relative ease audit their servers and outbound flow thus
making an o=! policy decision with more confidence and in less time
than, say, a Bank of America could. Coupled with an inherent
desire to protect what is, even for small business, a core
corporate asset, o=! would seem to me to be a welcome option.
Even when it decreases overall deliverability? That is to say, causes
legitimate email to be treated as forgeries and, likely, discarded.
I can see cases where that's going to be an appropriate tradeoff, but
I don't think they're as widespread as some people think.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html