--- Scott Kitterman <ietf-dkim(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> wrote:
Frankly all this discussion about let's go get the guy that signed the
message makes me really wonder why I would ever want to sign a message.
Back to my hobby horse of the week for a moment, unless you offer a
benifit to the sender, they won't sign. To me being able to protect my
domain name in a deterministic way would be a benifit potentially worth
taking some risk for. Getting on a whitelist or being subject to some
third party proprietary reputation vodoo doesn't get my blood moving.
Well, maybe it should. You see, the voodoo is already in place and frankly it
doesn't work all that well. Our goal is to get rid of it!
There are two simple factors here. One is a mechanism by which only you can
represent your domain. The second is a mechanism by which you (or others) can
make positive assurances about traffic from your domain.
I think DKIM provides the former and I can think of any number of ways in which
you could make provision for the latter - many of which haven't been invented
yet.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org