I'm a bit behind on this but:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 03:43:55PM -0500, J D Falk wrote:
I agree, that would be extremely helpful -- but DKIM's i= won't give it
to us. (Unless you're assuming that these same botnet operators will
allow themselves to be corralled into a single identifer, which clearly
isn't the case.)
this thinking needs to be applied to d= too. And once you do that, then
the logical conclusion (well, to me :)) is that d= isn't any better as
an identifier.
--
:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118
:: www.e-dialog.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
