Mike, I appreciate all the comments you shared in your last response. I'm replying to only one of them because I think this may be the consensus "best practice" I was looking for.
On Sep 9, 2010, at 12:36 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote: > The general rule would be to use a different domain that is > far enough from the transactional/brand domain that the risk of use for > enduser phishing is mitigated. Does everyone agree that this is the "best practice" for the use case provided (ignoring I only gave you two namespace options)? -- Brett _______________________________________________ dkim-ops mailing list [email protected] http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-ops
