I was curious by Scott comment re SPF. Is there a class of spam that cannot get a DKIM signature?
I would think botnets would be that class, as they usually infect computers and not sure they could DKIM sign as it would require them to set a DNS entry too. Knowing that botnets are 70% of spam, if DKIM could solve this one it would be great. so my question to add to your question "Does the presence of a signature provide any objective data about the goodness or badness of the signer?" is: is there a class of spam that cannot get a DKIM signature? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave CROCKER" <d...@dcrocker.net> To: "Franck Martin" <fra...@genius.com> Cc: "DKIM WG" <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org> Sent: Saturday, 1 August, 2009 4:04:28 PM GMT +12:00 Fiji Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM adoption Franck Martin wrote: > Yes the reputation of the domain override things, but what happens when > it is the first time a domain is seen? Does DKIM help or not? Does the presence of a signature provide any objective data about the goodness or badness of the signer? If the claim is that it does, there needs to be an explanation of the basis, because I don't see it. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
