On 9/8/10 11:23 AM, Jim Fenton wrote:
No, I'm suggesting that they publish an explicit dkim=unknown if that is
their intent.
It seems unlikely dkim=unknown will support their goal of ensuring most
phishing attempts are blocked. It also seems unlikely this assertion
will override rules intent on eliminating subdomain spoofing not
otherwise handled by ADSP dkim=discardable.
The TPA-Label draft attempted to avoid the dilemma created by
dkim=discardable in respect to normal email use and its undefined
handling of subdomains.
IMHO, their best choice is likely to keep their corporate domain
separate from their web presence and its transactional email. If they do
follow your advice, their results would prove informative for others.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
dkim-ops mailing list
dkim-ops(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-ops