On Thursday, May 26, 2011 07:40:17 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org > > [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of MH Michael Hammer > > (5304) Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 4:15 PM > > To: Scott Kitterman; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org > > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] MLMs and signatures again > > > > The other piece of the equation is how often do I see abusive mail > > purporting to be from this domain with no signature while mail from this > > domain that is normally signed has no significant problems. > > I posted the results of some research on that very question earlier this > week: > > http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2011q2/016656.html
My experience is it varies a lot by domain. Some domains are phishing targets and some aren't. If it's not a phishing target DKIM doesn't matter much either way. If it is, then if they can manage to sign all their outbound mail signed/not signed gets to be useful. So I don't think looking at global status is a very useful basis for deciding the question. Scott K _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
