ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: accept, deny, or other delivery decisions (was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP= FAILURE DETECTION)

2006-09-13 05:58:27
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:07:00AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Why do senders want to accept this risk?

Because they don't have a choice. At least ESPs don't. When Microsoft
said:

'If you do Sender-ID, you have a better chance of the message going
into the Inbox'.

'If you do Sender Score Certified (or whatever Bonded Sender is called
now), you have a better chance of the message going into the Inbox'.

Not to mention that their support desk uses both of these as excuses
when mail is either missing or in the bulk folder.

Even when a client has both of these, blocks/'missing mail'/'bulk folder
placement' still happen.

Currently system don't seem to take past reputation into consideration.
For instance, a customer could have a great reputation for months or
years, then one day, some one goofs (either the sender or the receiver)
and a block or placement into the bulk folder happens.


-- 
:: Jeff Macdonald | Principal Engineer, Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421 
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118 
:: www.e-dialog.com

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

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