On 06/24/2010 09:36 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:43 AM
To: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for draft-levine-dbr-
00(fwd)
The problem is that it's not possible to distinguish based solely on
self-published data the domain that's done all that work, and actually
understands the implications from the domain that's just published
an ADSP record because they'd heard it was a good idea, with no
understanding of the effect that would have on their email.
I don't think it's guaranteed that this is the case even if you go to the
site and personally interview the people that work there. I agree it
increases your chances, but it's not a bulletproof solution either. And over
time, any such guarantee you do manage to eke out could easily (and perhaps
is likely to) erode.
If the intent is to find something that works all the time, we should give up
now.
If we're okay with approximations, I'm not sure self-publication should be so
easily disqualified.
Right. If there's some value here, it would be a "clueless" service instead of
a "drop" service. Ie, "they say they know what they're doing, but don't". But
even that runs afoul of proving a negative because if the listed domain ever
screwed up for any reason, the "clueless" list could latch on to that and never
let go... how is it to know that the transgression has been remediated?
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html