Mark Delany wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:12:34AM -0600, Arvel Hathcock allegedly wrote:
Every piece of mail I've sent this morning has validated. Really.
That's because it was all Re: and already had the subject line tag.
It's your lucky day.
I'm not sure that's correct. The l= in Mike's signatures takes care of
the bits appended by the list to the end. The z= subject value can be
used by verifiers to take care of the subject munging this list
performs. The verifier then simply replaces the subject text with the
value from z= that was signed. That's one way of solving the mailing
list subject munging problem.
And there-in lies dragons methinks. Do you physically replace the
Subject: so that the final recipient gets the pre-list content or do
you logically replace it for the purposes of verifying?
But they're dragons that can be fought by those who wish
to fight them. Personally, I'm a fan of empowered maximized
acid orbs, with a Bigby's grasping hand for fun if they're
wimpy enough.
More to the point: these are all decisions that the receiving
software can make, and make with as little or as much granularity
as you wish to envision. There are many other possibilities
as well. I don't expect there is a one-size-fits-all solution,
which is why this entire area is unfit for standardization beyond
providing the base level tools.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html