ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ietf-dkim] Signalling DKIM support before DATA

2006-08-08 11:02:00
The way to do this (if it should be done) would be to use the SMTP extension 
mechanism.

For example. Define a command option SDATA, Reciever advertises it in response 
to EHLO, sender uses it to present signed data in place of DATA. 

Might be a better implementation but the point is we should use the SMTP 
extension mechanism not invent our own.

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org 
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Scott 
Kitterman
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 1:31 PM
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: [ietf-dkim] Signalling DKIM support before DATA

I think this new...

If there is a reasonable way to do it, it might be useful for 
receivers to be able to get a hint before going to DATA if 
the message is going to be DKIM signed.  I can envision 
looking for such a hint when evaluating a message from an IP 
address listed in an RBL and perhaps going to DATA to look 
for the promised signature.

Such a hint would, I imagine, only be useful when From = Mail 
From.  IIRC, that accounts for about 80% of mail.

If the information (such as the policy record perhaps) 
contained a list of authorized signing domains then a 
receiver could go to DATA and find out if it was worth 
expending the CPU cycles to verify.

I can see some potential for this to make signing more 
attractive to small senders who are more likely to be blocked 
due to RBLs.  It may be attractive to receivers as a way to 
reduce false positives from spam filtering techniques used on 
the envelope.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
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