ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity)

2007-11-29 13:47:05
Doug Otis opined:

 That's a ton of extra work, for very little benefit (from an anti-
spam point of view.)

No. With there being so many bots, it is common to find a large domain
sending a fairly high level of spam.  It would be helpful if there
were a means to mitigate spam from such a domain without blocking the
entire domain.

I agree, that would be extremely helpful -- but DKIM's i= won't give it
to us.  (Unless you're assuming that these same botnet operators will
allow themselves to be corralled into a single identifer, which clearly
isn't the case.)

Scott Kitterman responded:

 Then find a solution other than DOMAIN Keys Identified Mail for that
problem. A user level reputation system is going to be at least an
order
of magnitude harder than domain reputation and we really don't have
the
domain level problem figured out yet.

+1

--
J.D. Falk
Receiver Products
Return Path 

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