[ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]

[Andrew Newton]

On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:40 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:

> Oddly I think we are agreeing, so perhaps we're both going in the  
> wrong
> way ;-)  I thought the point was to bound DKIM's capability.  On the
> other hand, one could imagine a strict requirement for domain  
> assignment
> in some TLDs (perhaps this is already the case with .gov?).   
> Regardless,
> absent that level of authentication between the registrar and the  
> domain
> "owner" you're left with reputation services...

Actually, there are TLD registries that do have registration rules.   
This is true of many ccTLDs and some of the sTLDs (sponsored TLDs).   
But the vast majority of domain registrations are in TLDs that have  
no registration rules of the type being discussed here.

To say:

>> DKIM's ability to identify a domain owner is [also] bounded by
>> whatever checks a registration authority imposes.

could be read to mean some domain registration rules can be counted  
upon for this purpose.  Practically speaking, I don't think this is  
true at all.

-andy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/attachments/20060106/8d9700ac/attachment.html