ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ietf-dkim] user level ssp

2006-09-06 15:29:28
Its rather easier to do in the case of Yahoo mail since the infrastructure is 
already built out for very large scale and the management of the infrastructure 
is considerably more homogenous than typical large enterprise deployments.

I would not anticipate an issue but if there were an issue it is entirely 
practical to have a DNS zone with a large number of entries.

I see the need for per-user policies to be a transitional issue rather than a 
something you would expect to run for long periods.

Within that 219 million addresses you might find you have the need to define a 
small number of exceptions.

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org 
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of J.D. Falk
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 5:18 PM
To: IETF-DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] user level ssp

On 2006-09-06 14:12, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

Since you can wildcard the most common case one would need 
50,000 SSP 
records at most. It is likely that they would be generated 
automatically as individual mail servers were configured to 
use DKIM.

BITs are cheap. I see no problem in deploying 100,000 DKIM 
records in 
such a situation.

How will that scale to the 219,000,000 users that comScore 
thought Yahoo! Mail had about a year ago?

(The actual number is a trade secret, but comScore's close 
enough for this conversation.)

And, have any actual banks actually asked for this, or is it 
still entirely theoretical?

--
J.D. Falk, Anti-Spam Product Manager
Yahoo! Communications Platform Team
_______________________________________________
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>