On 5/11/2015 2:56 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
On 5/10/15 10:08 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Douglas Otis <doug.mtv...@gmail.com> wrote:
ATPS included an onerous task for any third-party service
likely used on a gratis basis. Each third-party was expected
to learn specific hash algorithms of each From domain. A
difficult process on top of changing their structure of DKIM
signatures repeated tens of thousands of times for each
different first party domain. In addition, reputations based
on the third-party relationship could not be leveraged
because of the optional hashing.
I continue to find this repeated claim specious at best.
Unlike TPA-Label that required NO third-party authentication
method change, ATPS imposed two significant changes onto
third-parties:
1) A need for a new DKIM signature unique for _every_ Author
domain seen by the mediator.
It should be off the DMARC record now.
2) A need to determine an _unspecified_ hash unique for each
Author domain seen by the mediator.
Do we really need a hash? I agree. This required new tools (Hash
calculators, wizard, command line tools, DNS tools, etc) for DNS admin
and sysops to be programmed. Makes it harder to explore.
Both of these unnecessary and difficult impositions do not
align with those benefiting (the DMARC domain).
+1.
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
