On 8/2/09 1:06 AM, Mark Delany wrote:
On Aug 1, 2009, at 9:14 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
But is ICANN supposed to clean all these random valid domains?
You half-joke, but one of the arguments we presented to the FTC back in
2003 or so regarding spam was that we had an opportunity to regulate
issuance of domain names. If not regulate, then at least insist on an
identifiable legal entity being required to register a domain.
Rather than viewing control of a domain as indicative of good email
behavior, positive reputations based upon histories of DKIM signatures
could offer an alternative or enhancement to methods currently used in
the disposition of messages.
As SMTP transitions into the use of IPv6, IP address reputations will
also need to rapidly transition to a positive mode of assessment as
perhaps the only method that has a chance to scale in the face of new
levels of abuse.
It might be interesting to review information exchanged during DKIM
assessment, such as a hash of the i= value in conjunction with the DKIM
key location. Perhaps a new industry standard could be adopted in this
regard. It might be interesting to find whether there might be interest
in developing third-party authorization schemes.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html