Steve Atkins wrote:
On Jun 14, 2006, at 2:26 PM, J.D. Falk wrote:
On 2006-06-14 14:04, Jim Fenton wrote:
The intent here was to present some thinking on how and why DKIM might
be used by mailing lists. It does not impact the -base specification
other than, hopefully, to show that what's in -base is sufficient for
mailing list usage. Some of this might be appropriate for the "DKIM
Overview Document" when we get to it.
It might be worthwhile to define "mailing list" in the document --
all of us here on this mailing list surely must know what the term
means, but the wider audience may assume it's about marketing and
become extremely confused.
Mailing-list is a very broad term. Some of this is applicable to
general mailing lists, but it seems that most of it was written
with "discussion lists" in mind. Defining "mailing list" to mean
the same thing as "discussion list" for this document might
increase confusion rather than reduce it.
Is it me, or does anybody else get nervous about the possibility of
this being a very deep and ultimately unrewarding rathole? This is
all very BCP-like, and I'm not sure we even know what the BCPs
ought to be at this point, and most especially for mailing lists. I really
don't think that the base suggestion of lists signing as the Sender/Listid
is actually rocket science and I've actually seen mailing lists in the wild
DKIM signing now, so it's at least pretty obvious to some mailing list
owners.
One comment about the text though: I really don't think we need to be
straying into the profit motivations of mailing list owners. That sentence
should just be deleted.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html