--On 29 October 2009 08:53:36 -0400 hector
<gmail(_dot_)sant9442(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Problem #1
Only DKIM=DISCARDABLE has an explicit handling mandate. DKIM=ALL does
not. So as in SPF=SOFTFAIL, DKIM=ALL leaves receivers in wasteful limbo.
No, they don't. They both provide useful information. For example, we
provide very limited whitelisting which requires that senders get an SPF
pass - to get on our whitelist, senders have to publish SPF records. The
skip some of our checks when they send mail from the right sender to the
right recipient through an SPF protected channel, but not otherwise.
DKIM=all gives me useful information, too. If I seem mail from such a
domain, without a signature, and can't see that it's taken a path that
might have broken a signature, then I know to treat the mail with
suspicion. I won't discard it, but I might reject it at SMTP time.
--
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