Douglas Otis wrote:
Being able to differentiate better vetted sources _within_ the well-
known domain restores a level of trust when messages are both signed
by the well-known domain, and also marked as restricted (either
transactional or administrative). This assumes the well-known domain
protects this trust by limiting access to these special keys (denoted
by special selectors). The well known service provider or
institution could have their administrative or transactional messages
obtain a trust annotation, without fearing one of their millions of
customers or less trustworthy employees will spoof other customers by
sending a hazardous message asking to apply a browser plug-in, for
example.
Why would this need standardization? All a domain needs to do is decide for
itself which selector subdomains to organize the different kinds of
traffic it
views as, well, different, and reputation systems ought to be able to
figure this
out for themselves. Indeed, they MUST be able to independently establish
that.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html