Hi Subramanian,
Thank you for your comments.
On 5/26/10 9:11 PM, SM wrote:
Hi Doug,
At 14:03 26-05-10, Douglas Otis wrote:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-otis-dkim-tpa-label-03
I read that draft. Are there any plans for an implementation? By the
way, the question is not to brush you off.
Murray suggested that at one time, he might be willing. It seems better
to first arrive at understanding the need.
The draft includes open code that is needed to generate the tpa labels,
and has been tested on few systems. The draft was aimed at illustrating
how domain based authorization schemes could implemented without
imposing an inordinate number of transactions. Since this scheme is
only needed to handle a small number of exceptions not practically
avoided, its impact should be slight.
The third-party scheme could also protect vanity domains signed by major
providers who confirm ownership prior to signing, i.e. gmail.
Why would unilateral authorization be troubling, since these are also
infrequent?
In this way, individuals would also be allowed to stray off the
reservation, provided they get permission. :^)
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html