Doug, > > Without conventions established for the use of this parameter, it will > offer only little value. Without conventions, only the reliance > parameter being greater than zero would be of any significance. > Conventions can recommend reliance levels for various types of sources > such as: > > Administrators 9 > Transactional email 8 > Permanent Employees 7 > Automated messages 6 > Mailing lists 5 > Domain Users 4 > Bulk 3 > Proxy Service 2 > Transparent Service 1 > Guests 0 > > With this type of list, a recipient wishing to annotate messages would > have a far better idea what level of reliance could be placed upon a > range of messages from an otherwise trusted and well-known domain. > Not all messages are trustworthy, even from a well-known domain. > Perhaps as a general practice, all domains would default to receiving > elevated annotation when exceeding a level of 5.
This seems to me to be a poor man's version of SSP, and I would think that we would consider it in such a context. But even if we were to consider this now, wouldn't different selectors cover this ground? Eliot _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
