[ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists should strip DKIM signatures
dhc at dcrocker.net
Tue Apr 27 11:32:03 PDT 2010
On 4/27/2010 11:08 AM, McDowell, Brett wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> On 4/27/2010 10:40 AM, McDowell, Brett wrote:
>>> That's how I see it. The key is that Y *validates* the DKIM signature
>>> and processes the sender's ADSP
>> Where is this going to be supported? That is, how widespread does anyone
>> believe that support for this scenario will be? Why?
> I'm not sure if you were asking this as a rhetorical question in an attempt
> to imply that such adoption would be low, or if you actually expected some of
> us who may have non-public knowledge of such plans to disclose them to this
> public mail list, or if you were soliciting speculation. In any event, I can
> only speculate.
I meant the question quite seriously.
When trying to specify anything, it's important to be clear about who is the
target for adopting it and how motivated they will be and how feasible adoption
will be within a useful timeframe.
If the specification is only intended for Yahoo and Google and there are good
signs they will adopt it, then fine.
If the goal is broader adoption, then Yahoo and Google can actually be
misleading examples, since they are not representative of the wider mailing list
management software or operations community.
More information about the ietf-dkim