John R Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, and if there were a proposal for standardizing something that
depended on solving World Hunger first, I would be skeptical of
that too.
Since the people I know involved with DKIM expect it to be plenty useful
without third party reputation
Mark Delany [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 11:57:29AM -0700, Eric Rescorla allegedly wrote:
We seem to be suffering from trying to hit a moving target.
Hmm... Maybe, but I think my comments are in line with comments
I've made previously. It's possible that my comments
- Original Message -
From: Eric Rescorla [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Earl Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exact domain spoofing. I.e. There is a desire to at least deal
with cases to avoid unauthorized use of an exact domain. Look-alike
attacks are a much more difficult problem since human
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 01:05:40AM -0700, Eric Rescorla allegedly wrote:
It certainly doesn't make your analysis a pre-requisite of
anything, does it?
Of course not. But equally, it doesn't mean that it's a bad idea
to do it.
No. Sigh. It's actually a good idea to do it. And your level
No. Sigh. It's actually a good idea to do it. And your level of detail
certainly makes the issues coherent, tangible and addressable. My quibble
is over the timing and the newness of them. Not that such quibbles ever
count for anything.
I think it is considerably more than a quibble. It
- Original Message -
From: Arvel Hathcock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Other companies may decide that it's unwise to
completely relax policy on a domain-wide scale
simply to allow mailing list use. For those, putting
list participants on a separate sub-domain could
20050039019 (20050039017)
,---
| 1. A method for message authentication, comprising: generating a key
| pair associated with a domain, wherein a public component of the key
| pair is accessible to a domain name system (DNS) server that is
| associated with the domain; if a message originates from
On October 30, 2005 at 09:29, Arvel Hathcock wrote:
Other companies may decide that it's unwise to completely relax policy on a
domain-wide scale simply to allow mailing list use.
Note, this makes an assumption about the nature of the business.
For example, is what you suggest practical for
On October 30, 2005 at 10:57, Douglas Otis wrote:
Claiming this to be a freely available option is being rather naive, as
it only takes the arm twisting by a few major players where this becomes
no longer a choice. As a result, the ability to use email services will
have been lost as well as
