On Oct 16, 2009, at 6:33 AM, Michael Deutschmann wrote:
I'd like to more emphatically state the case for adding a
"dkim=except-mlist" policy to ADSP. It will soon become a practical
issue for me, since my mailserver software (Exim) is going to support
DKIM in its next version.
Without it, I'd have to use "dkim=unknown", which is effectively no
ADSP
at all.
To review, "dkim=except-mlist" would mean:
I sign everything leaving my bailiwick, but may post to mailing lists
that break the signature. You are *on your own* in telling the
difference between mailing list mail (which may be good despite a
broken signature) and directly sent mail (that is always signed). If
you can't tell, then treat as dkim=unknown (ie: assume a message is
ML traffic unless you know otherwise.).
(Incidentally, anyone have a better name for this policy?)
dkim=all.
dkim=all says that you sign all mail you send, and nothing more. The
difference between that and what you write above for a receiver is
nil, I think.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html