ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: Better definition of "DKIM signing complete" required

2006-11-24 04:19:28
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:07:06 -0000, Hector Santos <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com> wrote:

Charles Lindsey wrote:

 Because news and email regularly get gatewayed into each other.

But this suggest that you have a DKIM-NNTP based protocol...

It suggests no such thing. Read what I wrote and respond to that, and not to some strawman of your own invention.

You need to address the base system first which is 1 to 1 EMAIL concept before we even have a chance to make it work in a 1 to MANY or MANY to MANY environment.

Unfortunately, the world is already way beyond 1 to 1 EMAIL. If you introduce DKIM without having previously considered the consequences for all existing practices, then perfectly legitimate things which have always worked will start to fail. And it is DKIM which will get the blame

Suppose foo.example announces that it "signs everything" (presumably we intend that to mean all emails). So if joe(_at_)foo(_dot_)example sends an unsigned email, it is sure to be treated with "suspicion". But what if joe(_at_)foo(_dot_)example posts an article to some newsgroup? DKIM in Usenet might be found to be a good idea someday, but it is not likely to be in our drafts and is not in our charter.

Right, so why are fussing around with this can of worms? If the user with an exclusive domain is going outside a domain policy to post mail in a newsgroup,

Hold on! Read what I said. I said nothing about posting mail in a newsgroup. I spoke about posting news in a newsgroup, and DKIM is not involved in that because, as you correctly said, DKIM does not apply to NNTP (yet).

The problem does not arise until someone far away gates that news article back into email, at which point its lack of a DKIM signature suddenly gets noticed. So we need to think abut this and establish the correct procedures to be followed (maybe some signature by the gatewayer, or maybe some action by the mailing list admin that it was gatewayed to).

And maybe (USEFOR hat on here) gateways from news to email ought
 > to be adding suitable Resent-* headers.

IMV, we should stop trying to mix EMAIL vs NEWS - two different things.

"We" (TINW) are not in a position to stop it. It already happens. Gatewaying between newsgroups and mailing lists is an already established feature of Usenet. You (TINY) have to live with that.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131     Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>