ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] NO DKIM "POLICY"

2009-02-19 15:59:58

On Feb 19, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Hector Santos wrote:

What is the current recommended method to establish or expose that a  
DOMAIN should not be signed, is not expected to be signed and that  
any DKIM supportive receiver seeing a message with a signature from  
a purported domain should be rejected with full confidence?

Will a NULL public key do the trick?

"Do Not Use DKIM" assertions are not possible.  Key locations can be  
published within any sub-domain, however spoofing is unlikely to  
reference a valid public key, unless your domain permits customers to  
publish TXT records within one of your sub-domains. : ^(

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

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