In
<C6DDA43B91BFDA49AA2F1E473732113E010BEF8F(_at_)mou1wnexm05(_dot_)vcorp(_dot_)ad(_dot_)vrsn(_dot_)com>
"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> writes:
[mailto:owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of wayne
Despite asking several times on the MASS mailing list, I have
yet to see any data on the false positive rates for DK, IIM,
William's DK-IIM merged system, CSV, or SES. [...]
They certainly work better in certain circumstances, but at this point I
would not want to publish any data because I don't know how typical those
circumstances and in any case the issue is irrelevant.
I can certainly believe this.
DK and SPF have different failure modes. I don't think this is a competition
situation. A system with both schemes is much more effective than either on
its own.
I completely, 100% agree and I can not emphisized this enough. I see
things like SPF and crypto systems as complementary systems, not
competing systems. I'm sorry I forgot to mention that.
-wayne