Steve Atkins schrieb:
I suspect that the majority of email sent has three of those four
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
implemented. If not quite a majority it's _definitely_ a large fraction.
vs.
So I'm fairly comfortable saying, from personal experience, that the
majority of commercial bulk email sent (via ESPs or under the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
supervision of competent delivery staff) is using SPF and most of
it is signed with one or both of DK and DKIM.
There is a huge difference between the two, and a lot of people do not
care much about the latter.
For the former, given the lack of support for DK/DKIM signing in the two
most pervasive corporate email servers (Exchange and Lotus Notes), it's
reasonable to expect such mail *not* to be signed.
That right there is a large fraction of legitimate email
that's carried over the internet. Throw in the number of major consumer
ISPs who are signing with DK and/or DKIM and which have SPF records
in place and that's probably a majority.
Maybe it's different for US-based providers, but I do not know of any
significant European provider doing DK/DKIM signing.
-- Matthias
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg