Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:53 PM, J.D. Falk > <jdfalk-li...@cybernothing.org> wrote: >> It's irrelevant for purposes of spam filtering, but not for the equally >> valid purpose of "is this message really from my grandma?" >> >> (Or, more accurately, "is this message really from my grandma's email >> address?") > > 1. Does her grandson run mailops at the receiver ISP?
It's possible, but I don't think it matters. > 2. Does the receiver ISP make finegrained control based on dkim sigs > part of the client experience for the user? Sure, why not? The end user doesn't have to understand DKIM any more than they currently understand headers. > And how do they stop it being gamed, how do they keep > state for millions of accounts, and then keep changing things around > when grandsom breaks up with one girlfriend, suddenly decides another > dude is a twit etc? With something like DKIM providing a stable, authentic identifier, all that stuff is (clearly) difficult. But if they continue to rely solely on the From: header, it's basically impossible. > That's not layering trust as much as it becomes a gigantic social > networking site based on dkim, scaled large enough Exactly! A number of mail systems have already started experimenting with a social inbox -- both filtering and display concepts -- while at the same time, a number of social networks are already leaning towards traditional internetwork email. It's inevitable. -- J.D. Falk Return Path Inc http://www.returnpath.net/ _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
