What is ironic about all this DKIM forwarding issue is the same issue
that SPF forwarding had. This was one of the marketing advantages of
DKIM - that it didn't have a forwarding problem.
Well, it does. ...
It's also possible -- we'll have to see what happens -- that mailing
lists could change their behaviour to take better advantage of DKIM
(with the specs that are already published). That's not an option
they had with SPF.
The sensible way for lists to change their behavior is to SIGN THE
MAIL THEY SEND.
People apparently seem to have trouble distinguishing between mail Bob
sent directly to you, and mail that Bob sent to a list which decorated
his message and then passed along to you. DKIM makes that easy to
handle -- when the list signs its mail, you can reliably tell that no
matter what's on the From line, this message is from the list so you
can do whatever you do with list mail without having to worry about
who sent it to the list in the first place, just like you do now.
Ironically, this is also a situation that SPF handles adequately;
lists invariably apply their own bounce addresses to do automated
bounce management, so as far as SPF is concerned, mail from the list
is from the list. Sender-Id doesn't work so good here, though.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html