[dkim-ops] Test Results for various reflectors

[SM]

Hi Dan,
At 16:21 08-06-2006, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>I'm guessing there's no space within the spec for a signature to 
>include which spec it was signed to be in compliance with -- and to 
>ignore otherwise, or use the all-important feedback address?

No, the signature doesn't include which draft it follows at the 
moment.  The autoresponders should be backward compatible and verify 
a DKIM signature for a previous implementation.  There is an email 
address mentioned in the specifications.  There are also contact 
addresses on the websites.

>Well, I was more looking for contacts at each individual site 
>running a reflector.  Leaving a decaying piece of software out in 
>the open is not a good thing.

I doubt the reflectors are running decaying software. :)

>MTA
>MTA Version

The above two do not affect DKIM verification.

>DKIM Verifier (milter/spamassassin plugin/etc?)

Most of the verifiers are either milter-based or an in-house 
implementation.  If I am not mistaken, the ones you listed do not use 
the Spamassassin plugin.

Regards,
-sm