RE: Statistic-Report: DNSSEC-Trend

From: Murray S. Kucherawy <msk_at_cloudmark.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:47:50 -0800

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendkim-dev-bounce_at_lists.opendkim.org [mailto:opendkim-dev-bounce_at_lists.opendkim.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Schulze
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:40 AM
> To: opendkim-dev_at_lists.opendkim.org
> Subject: Statistic-Report: DNSSEC-Trend
>
> Hi Murray,
>
> I have some questions about the database an the generates statistics.
>
> - http://opendkim.org/stats/report.html#dnssec_trend
> is that the total number of new, unseen domains using dnssec per month?

It is the number of unique domains seen in any given month for which DNSSEC resulted in either a "bogus" or "secure" result, which means for those domains DNSSEC is returning something meaningful. It's an attempt to observe how many domains are actually deploying DNSSEC protecting their DKIM keys or ADSP policies. It is skewed, however, by the number of reporting sites that run with libunbound. Obviously we used to have more than we do now.

> - in contrast:
> http://opendkim.org/stats/report.html#signing_trend_domain
> which are the total numbers per month both are named "trend"

This one is the number of unique domains for which we saw signatures in each month, as a measure of DKIM uptake.

> - I do not understand http://opendkim.org/stats/report.html#use_counts

It means we've seen 30859 different domains each send exactly one signed message, 17215 send exactly two signed messages, etc. It's meant to show that a substantial number of domains send a small number of DKIM-signed messages and then go away, meaning spammers are using DKIM to try to get better inbox penetration.

> - info: compared to
> http://opendkim.org/stats/report.html#signing_trend_msg
> I see a rate of only 15% at *my* company mx server
> (only 200.000 Mails, 6 weeks)

There are ebbs and flows, but a general upward trend is a good thing.

> - you do not delete data from your database. At least you have data
> from 2010.
> what would be a plan to purge old data ...

Yes, on the rollout of 2.5.0, I will begin recycling old data, perhaps at 180 days or something like that.

> - do you plan a beta12?

Yes, I'll do that today.

-MSK
Received on Tue Feb 07 2012 - 19:47:58 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Oct 29 2012 - 23:33:31 PST