[ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists should strip DKIM signatures
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at cloudmark.com
Fri Apr 30 08:48:44 PDT 2010
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
> bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 8:32 AM
> To: dcrocker at bbiw.net
> Cc: ietf-dkim at mipassoc.org
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists
> should strip DKIM signatures
> Perhaps poorly chosen words. But I think most understood the intent.
> I'm willing to go from a world where any system can use my From to one
> where only the systems I say can. And that means changes.
It has been pointed out that MLM implementers have even more inertia than your average MTA implementer. Although many header fields have been invented specifically for the purpose of aiding list management (your List-Id: and List-Unsubscribe:, not to mention Sender:), their adoption has not exactly been universal.
So you might be gung ho for big changes that will make things better, but we need to accept the fact that a substantial portion of the installed base won't change, at least not soon, and we can't ignore them. Any BCP we produce will have to take that into account.
More information about the ietf-dkim