[ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft

[Jeff Macdonald]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 11:23:39AM -0400, John L wrote:
>>>> d=bigmarketingcompany.com
>>>> i=@brandA.bigmarketingcompany.com
>>>>
>>>> d=bigmarketingcompany.com
>>>> i=@brandB.bigmarketingcompany.com
>
>> That is an interesting view. I can accomplish the same by using
>> sub-domains in d= instead. Are you simpy going to strip
>> sub-domains from d= too?
>
> Honestly, I'll do whatever seems easiest in my goal to deliver the mail my 
> users want, which may or may not be the mail you think they want.  The best 
> thing for senders to do, as you note below, is to divide up the mail stream 
> in ways that make life easier for receivers.
>
>> It is interesting that receivers (Hotmail/AOL/Yahoo) suggest to senders
>> to separate their different type of mail streams
>> (transactional,marketing,etc) by using IPs. The same can be
>> accomplished with DKIM and i=.
>
> Indeed, since that makes it easier to handle the ads their users don't care 
> about differently from the transactions they want.  But I can't help but 
> note that your example above was different clients, not different 
> categories.

Ah, I see the disconnect. bigmarketingcompany is not the same as ESP.
Here's a better example:

d=mattel.com
i=@barbie.mattel.com

d=mattel.com
i=@fisher-price.mattel.com

d=mattel.com
i=@hotwheels.mattel.com

d=mattel.com
i=@american-girl.mattel.com

-- 
:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald at e-dialog.com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421 
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118 
:: www.e-dialog.com