[ietf-dkim] Re: Blocking improperly signed messages

[Frank Ellermann]

Steve Atkins wrote:
 
> to summarize, you believe that SSP is drastically less likely
> to provide any operational benefit or achieve widespread
> deployment than SPF?

I wouldn't compare SPF and SSP, they're mostly unrelated.  For
a comparison of SenderID and SSP it's hard to judge, the "PRA"
concept makes more sense than looking only at the 2822-From.

On the other hand SenderID is based on an IP enumeration (like
SPF), and DKIM on a signature surviving almost everything excl.
"some" (= unfortunately almost all) irregular mailing lists.

If SSP sticks to the 2822-From as its method to identify some
kind of "authority" for _unsigned_ mails I think it's hopeless.

Phil's ideas about updating algorithms could still work, no 
matter what the rest of SSP tries to achieve.

Frank