ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists should strip DKIM signatures

2010-04-30 08:02:58


On 4/30/2010 3:16 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
2) One possible recommendation to list managers is that if a message to
the list is DKIM signed AND has an ADSP discardable policy AND the
signature cannot be maintained intact then the list should bounce the
message.

What is the particular benefit of doing this, rather than letting the
receiving  site do the bouncing?  This is extra mechanism for the MLM,
and most MLMs won't  be supporting it.  I'm trying to get a clear sense
of the value proposition for  this.

The receiving site would bounce to the list.

As John has reminded us, this is not about a bounce message.  Rather, it 
concerns an independent report, sent to an independently-registered address.


Certainly *my* MTA/MLM setup (Exim/Mailman) can be configured to do this.
In fact, Exim could be configured to do this with any MLM behind it.

What are the procedures for having this configuration cause FBL reports go to 
an 
address that is different from the one registered in the FBL?

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

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