Steve Atkins wrote:
On May 1, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Jim Fenton wrote:
People whose work environments consist solely of three level
hostnames see it as a magic bullet. Those who don't, see it as
a hack that adds complexity for recipients without buying the
senders any functionality they didn't already have via less
intrusive methods.
Intrusive? How does this intrude?
It adds an additional network query for every email received by a
typical receiver. That's very intrusive.
I was focusing on the definition of "intrusive" as "intrude into one's
private life".
It's a single, frequently-cached lookup that's performed for every
message lacking an author signature, where the author domain does not
have a published ADSP.
It seems a bit strange that this lookup is considered intrusive, while
the many other queries performed in the normal course of an SMTP
transaction (reverse lookup on client's IP address, forward lookup on
HELO hostname, etc.) seem to be OK with everyone, maybe because they're
just common practice and not written down everywhere.
How many levels of hostnames does cisco use, as a real world example?
With very few exceptions, 1. Cisco's namespace is almost entirely flat.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html