Jeff Macdonald wrote:
>
I also hadn't realized that DKIM was strictly meant to benefit
receivers.
Did you really think DKIM will alter the deeply embedded mail filtering
landscape? :-)
That is why I always said, the only real true benefit of DKIM is FAILURE
analysis. Receivers will protect senders from FORGERY when unexpected
FAILURE occurs, and it will protect receivers with more high true
positives filtering.
I do hope the DMA industry does not get blinded by the false idea DKIM
validation of their mail is going to give them a free pass. I would
never trust it. But if is it FAILURE, maybe you don't want your
reputation further ruined by passing it on. If you don't care, when why
should the receiver?
For us to even bother signing mail, we have to have some SSP assurance
that receivers are going to DUMP forged mail. Otherwise, to me, there
is no payoff - but just glorified worthless overhead.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html