--On 17 August 2010 19:14:30 +0000 John Levine <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com>
wrote:
I'm trying to get the same goal by recommending adding some
non-artisicly specified form of a "list: mlm.example" display so its
more evident to the user without percentage hacks.
I must be missing something. What does this have to do with DKIM?
If this were important, why don't MUAs look for the already standard
List-ID header, regardless of whether it's signed? In my experience,
nearly all of the mail that makes it through existing spam filters and
has a List-ID header is really from a list.
Yes, I think that's my experience too: nearly all. Unfortunately, I had to
disable a filter which would file an email in lists/listname and
automatically create the mailbox if necessary. I ended up with more
mailboxes created by spam than by genuine list emails.
So, while most messages with a list-id header were genuine, most distinct
list-ids that I saw were not.
I guess it would be nice if list servers could use OAuth to authenticate my
subscription requests against my mail infrastructure, and then my servers
would recognise and record the request. Then it could treat messages from
the list with a higher trust level, and -for example- file them accordingly.
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html