[ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful

[Michael Thomas]

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> I am not really bothered by the direct mail use case. They have
> infrastructure support. 
> 
> But mailing lists are a different matter. Mailing lists are typically run on
> pensioned off hardware. Delays can already be an issue. The issue is not so
> much signature time, it is messaging architecture. Most code deals with the
> head and the body separately. This creates a dependency I would like to
> avoid.  

I'm having a real hard time understanding this. I run a few mailing
lists, and as far as I can tell DKIM as in -allman-01 works fine,
and wouldn't be helped at all by this proposal.

		Mike