-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Meng Weng Wong writes:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 05:43:15PM +0100, Ernesto Baschny wrote:
|
| Meng, could you write up a comparison table between Caller-ID and SPF? I
| have seen plenty of similarities and some crucial differences. You could
| also weight the (dis)advantages of each difference.
|
I am doing a comparison table between all the antispam technologies I
know of. I'm about a third of the way through and hope to finish it by
the end of this week.
Missing one set of interested parties...
Meanwhile here's a condensed version of the analysis.
The important factors are:
- what is it selling?
- can it make good on its promises?
- what is the implementation cost?
- what is the deployment cost for the sender?
- - what is the deployment cost for mailing list servers?
- what is the deployment cost for the receiver?
- what fraction of the internet needs to play along?
- what do the end-user humans have to do?
-------
if we somewhat arbitrarily segment the internet into the following eight
sectors, this is the cost grid: (view in a monospaced font)
DomainKeys Caller-ID SPF
sender humans all have to configure their MUAs to do SMTP AUTH when they
roam
sender MUAs - - -
sender MTAs upgrade - -
sender ISPs publish,configure publish publish
forwarders - upgrade upgrade
mailing lists upgrade - -
receiver MTAs (upgrade) (upgrade) upgrade
receiver MUAs (upgrade) upgrade* -
receiver humans - examine -
This added because DK hashes the message body, and some mailing list
software (MailMan for example, or this list) modifies the body,
which will cause DK failures.
- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFAPOKIQTcbUG5Y7woRAiDwAKDdpDkjcv3gTwBZTrCb4g+TC8BocACgg7FF
yUUZobFWJfmG/c5UVMfV9ZA=
=k3HH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----