I understand that it is not a reputation service, however, I am now at the
mercy of my ISP's reputation and not mine. In fact, they are full of bots
and spammers.
Consider:
I never sign email coming from Holiday Inn where 50% on my workforce lives
out of suitcases but Holiday Inn does sign (inconsequential)
I always sign email coming from the home office in Walla Walla.
Therefore my rule says that I sometimes sign. But what good did that do me?
My ISP is the issue, not Holiday Inn. So, if I was able to say I sometimes
sign my email and I always sign from the home office, it would be too much
of a DNS load to describe where I might sometimes sign. It would be better
if I could specifically just distrust my ISP.
Regards,
Damon Sauer
On 8/1/06, Hector Santos <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Thomas" <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com>
To: "Damon" <deepvoice(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
> There has been suggestion in the past of the desire for a policy
> for "I sign everything, don't accept a message with *any*
> third party signatures". I've yet to see why anybody would
> want to set such a policy in real life though.
hmmm, Isn't this "highly exclusive" policy just happens to be the most
powerful protection the DKIM protocol has to offer?
If made available, the highest protection, will be the most likely policy
used... in real life.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html