On Thursday, May 26, 2011 07:40:17 PM 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 MH Michael
Hammer
(5304) Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 4:15 PM
To: Scott Kitterman; ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] MLMs and signatures again
The other piece of the equation is how often do I see abusive mail
purporting to be from this domain with no signature while mail from this
domain that is normally signed has no significant problems.
I posted the results of some research on that very question earlier this
week:
http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2011q2/016656.html
My experience is it varies a lot by domain. Some domains are phishing targets
and some aren't. If it's not a phishing target DKIM doesn't matter much
either way. If it is, then if they can manage to sign all their outbound mail
signed/not signed gets to be useful. So I don't think looking at global
status is a very useful basis for deciding the question.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html