<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: IP Reputation Portability</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2007/09/ip-reputation-portability/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2007/09/ip-reputation-portability/</link>
	<description>Spam, delivery, email and more</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: laura</title>
		<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2007/09/ip-reputation-portability/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>laura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 22:10:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wordtothewise.com/index.php/2007/09/24/ip-reputation-portability/#comment-36</guid>
		<description>The issue is that Microsoft has tied their hands by pushing SenderID, which only authenticates based on IP as presented in a SPF/SenderID record. It was a bad idea 3 years ago, it's a bad idea now, and it results in questions about how to transfer reputation between IP addresses. 

You and I both know that IP reputation is a stop gap, but rolling out the real domain authentication technology is taking a very long time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue is that Microsoft has tied their hands by pushing SenderID, which only authenticates based on IP as presented in a SPF/SenderID record. It was a bad idea 3 years ago, it&#8217;s a bad idea now, and it results in questions about how to transfer reputation between IP addresses. </p>
<p>You and I both know that IP reputation is a stop gap, but rolling out the real domain authentication technology is taking a very long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2007/09/ip-reputation-portability/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:15:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wordtothewise.com/index.php/2007/09/24/ip-reputation-portability/#comment-34</guid>
		<description>IP reputation is not portable.  That's what domain authentication is supposed to fix.  Hotmail's description misses the point that once you have an authenticated domain, the reputation of individual ips no longer matters, only the reputation of the domain as a whole.  Nothing needs to be "transferred", it's all the same entity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IP reputation is not portable.  That&#8217;s what domain authentication is supposed to fix.  Hotmail&#8217;s description misses the point that once you have an authenticated domain, the reputation of individual ips no longer matters, only the reputation of the domain as a whole.  Nothing needs to be &#8220;transferred&#8221;, it&#8217;s all the same entity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
