On Sep 13, 2006, at 11:21 AM, J.D. Falk wrote:
I hope we see a wider variety of real-world implementations soon so
that we can figure out what's actually going to happen, rather than
just guessing (whether those guesses are educated or not.)
You seem to be suggesting the WG should conclude
On 2006-09-12 22:49, Hector Santos wrote:
Anyway, I don't think you interpreted the concern incorrectly.
Certainly possible. I hope we see a wider variety of real-world
implementations soon so that we can figure out what's actually going to
happen, rather than just guessing (whether those g
On Sep 13, 2006, at 4:35 AM, Hector Santos wrote:
It is because of that inconsistent DKIM reception handling
unknowns between different systems, we risk encouraging DKIM bad
actors to proliferate against the new creation of different
potential targets.
In summary, the concern is that the
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 08:48 -0400, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
>
> Even when a client has both of these, blocks/'missing mail'/'bulk
> folder placement' still happen.
>
> Currently system don't seem to take past reputation into
> consideration. For instance, a customer could have a great reputation
> fo
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:07:00AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Why do senders want to accept this risk?
Because they don't have a choice. At least ESPs don't. When Microsoft
said:
'If you do Sender-ID, you have a better chance of the message going
into the Inbox'.
'If you do Sender Score Cer
- Original Message -
From: "Douglas Otis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Hector Santos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> It is because of that inconsistent DKIM reception handling unknowns
>> between different systems, we risk encouraging DKIM bad actors to
>> proliferate against the new creation of dif
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 01:49 -0400, Hector Santos wrote:
> It is because of that inconsistent DKIM reception handling unknowns
> between different systems, we risk encouraging DKIM bad actors to
> proliferate against the new creation of different potential targets.
>
> In summary, the concern is th
