Earl Hood wrote:
On October 31, 2005 at 06:34, Graham Murray wrote:
For some businesses (like the mybank example that has been raised),
such restrictions are desirable, and probably justifiable. But if
ISPs and other email service providers adopt EXCLUSIVE policies...
Then many (more) 'vanity' domain owners and small businesses will
have to revert to the 'traditional' mechanism and run their own mail
servers.
Which increases "entry" costs. It also ignores the fact that many
users do not have vanity domains and are not SOHOs: using a central
address as a point of contact, either it be the address assigned
to them from an ISP, a mailbox service provider, or some other
organization like a school.
Huh? How exactly are isp's forcing vanity domains to do anything?
If I'm the registrant of a domain, I can take my zone and everything
associated with it to wherever I feel like serving it from. Therefore,
the vanity domain owner retains complete control over the signing and
policy that affects that domain. It seems to me that what you're
bringing up is that current practice is likely to change rather than
disenfranchisement.
Mike
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org