Douglas Otis wrote:
I really don't see why it matters from where it sent and how. Do you
have a preferred type of burglar knocking on your door? <g>
Many different doors could be helped by DKIM. While there might be an
expectation that those knocking at the front door will validate their
affiliation, there may be different expectations for those at the back
door. The difference might be as simply as not buying wares from those
at the back door. When someone escorts them to the front door, they
might be asked to validate their affiliation, although likely unprepared
to do so. While moving everyone to a common doorway may seem ideal,
this creates a significant problem when the front door carries a greater
obligation. Different doors need different policies when there are
different levels of trust based upon the door used. At some distant
point in the future, perhaps all doors will be treated the same, but
time has not arrived.
Doug,
That time came long ago.
Remember, this is predominately about anonymous vs non-anonymous
transactions and systems have always treaty anonymous and non-anonymous
transactions differently.
An anonymous back door is the last thing we want, although this strongly
appears what the ASP model is promoting. :-)
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html