[ietf-dkim] 822/2822 or just 2822
hsantos at santronics.com
Mon Jul 24 08:00:34 PDT 2006
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Otis" <dotis at mail-abuse.org>
To: <ned+dkim at mauve.mrochek.com>
> Striving to allow the message to be verified at the MUA increases the
> possible success of DKIM in offering the desired assurance. While there
> may be problems in some cases, many of these cases could be avoidable.
> Signing at the MUA offers less value and will likely see a higher level
> of failure. There are many reasons to caution about signing at the MUA.
If this is deemed to be desirable (no MUA signing), what mechanism would be
used to control it from happening?
A signed DKIM message with no HOP information?
Basically how would you distinguish an MUA vs. MTA?
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
More information about the ietf-dkim