--On 15 October 2009 15:19:36 +0000 John Levine <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com>
wrote:
No, ADSP adds the ability for senders to make unverified assertions
about their signing practices. Unless you already have some
knowledge about the domain, you have no idea whether it would be
useful to believe it.
On the contrary, it adds the ability for domain owners to make those
asertions. Assuming that the domain owner has control of his own DNS
records, those assertions are as reliable as the reputation of the
relevant Domain Registrar (you can argue about how reliable that is,
if you wish).
Huh? Maybe things are different where you live, but in this part of
the world, registrars like Godaddy have millions of customers and know
nothing more about them than that their credit card charge for $8 was
approved. It's hard to imagine how anyone could think that a
registrar would know anything at all about its customers mailing
practices.
To put it concretely, your registrar is JANET, which is a fairly
reputable organization. Are you claiming that means that ADSP
published by random ac.uk subdomains are all going to be accurate and
useful?
Mine's JANET, too. Sure, they won't all be accurate, but if they're
inaccurate then I know how to get hold of someone to fix the problem.
Anyway, the person who cares most about the accuracy is the domain owner
(or their customers).
As an admin, I'd like to be able to reject mail for lacking a DKIM
signature. Without a supporting ADSP, I risk the ire of my users. With a
supporting ADSP, I can point the finger at the publisher of the policy.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html