[ietf-dkim] I sign nothing / only only 3rd party / some mail

[Jim Fenton]

Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 4:23 PM -0700 7/27/06, Jim Fenton wrote:
>> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>  At 12:17 PM -0700 7/27/06, Steve Atkins wrote:
>>>>  On Jul 27, 2006, at 12:08 PM, wayne wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  In <p06230903c0eeb486a116@[10.20.30.182]> Paul Hoffman
>>>>>  <phoffman at proper.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  "I sign some mail" doesn't tell the recipient anything useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  What am I missing?
>>>>>
>>>>>  It says that you should look at email without a signature as being
>>>>>  "acceptable", unlike a "I sign all mail" which without a
>>>>> signature is
>>>>>  quite questionable.
>>>>
>>>>  How does that differ from a sender that doesn't have the
>>>>  "I sign some mail" flag set?
>>>
>>>  Yes, exactly.
>> Might the SSP record that says "I sign some mail", which could have a
>> long TTL, be more effectively cached by DNS than the (negative) caching
>> when there's no record?
>
> Both should cache equally, shouldn't they? There are not levels of
> caching.
What I meant was that negative caching has a TTL which is the minimum
TTL of the zone (likely to be small), while the SSP record can be given
a long TTL because it's unlikely to change frequently.  However, that's
a pretty marginal benefit.

-Jim
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
>