On 06/01/2010 11:43 AM, John Levine wrote:
I have to say that I share much of Dave's bafflement. And as a minor
list developer, I don't recognize any MLM I know in many of the
assertions below.
I was more highlighting there was an active choice in a MLM development to
remove DKIM headers (as a default enabled option I think) and without a
guidance such as what the draft is trying to achieve there could be more.
It's challenging to parse that sentence, but if you're saying that
MLMs currently strip DKIM headers, they don't other than perhaps by
turning on a general header-stripping feature. We're still arguing
about whether it's a good idea to do so.
Mailman in particular was at one point stripping DKIM headers specifically
in at least one version until I convinced them that was the wrong thing
to do. Whether they actually incorporated the change back to leaving them
alone, I don't know.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html