[ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists annex MUA considerations

[Ian Eiloart]

--On 17 August 2010 19:14:30 +0000 John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

>> I'm trying to get the same goal by recommending adding some
>> non-artisicly  specified form of a "list: mlm.example" display so its
>> more evident to the  user without percentage hacks.
>
> I must be missing something.  What does this have to do with DKIM?
>
> If this were important, why don't MUAs look for the already standard
> List-ID header, regardless of whether it's signed?  In my experience,
> nearly all of the mail that makes it through existing spam filters and
> has a List-ID header is really from a list.

Yes, I think that's my experience too: nearly all. Unfortunately, I had to 
disable a filter which would file an email in lists/listname and 
automatically create the mailbox if necessary. I ended up with more 
mailboxes created by spam than by genuine list emails.

So, while most messages with a list-id header were genuine, most distinct 
list-ids that I saw were not.

I guess it would be nice if list servers could use OAuth to authenticate my 
subscription requests against my mail infrastructure, and then my servers 
would recognise and record the request. Then it could treat messages from 
the list with a higher trust level, and -for example- file them accordingly.


-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/