On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Jeff Macdonald
<macfisherman(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>wrote:
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 5:21 PM, J.D. Falk
<jdfalk-lists(_at_)cybernothing(_dot_)org>wrote:
On Sep 9, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Rumor has is that some large players (such as Yahoo!) are
disregarding such ephemeral property of a selector and
are trying to associate a reputation scheme based on both
the domain *and* the selector.
That rumour is based on a presentation I gave in 2006 or so, while working
at Yahoo!. Within hours, Dave Crocker had convinced me that tying
reputation to the selector was a bad idea.
Please help me quash the rumour, there's enough baseless FUD already.
http://feedbackloop.yahoo.net/
Step 2 doesn't help. (yes, you can put * for all selectors, but asking for
one when it isn't really needed leads to FUD).
Yeah, I've always thought this process was a bit odd. I began to question
if it even mattered to them and, furthermore, how much weight they were
actually putting on Domain vs. IP for reputation.
Alex Soto
alex(_at_)thesotos(_dot_)org
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html