On 3/31/2011 9:08 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I don’t think it’s a silly question. In fact I recently approached the
Mailman
people to explore this question from their perspective.
It may be interesting or even somewhat useful to set up a new header
canonicalization that tolerates this kind of thing for lists, but the real
problem is that, statistically speaking, a list that adds a mnemonic to a
Subject: field in the way you’re discussing usually also does other things to
the list that will change the body. The MLM draft we have approaching WGLC
talks about several of these. It would be pretty complicated to construct a
canonicalization that anticipates all or even most of those.
To add to this for folks: Murray and I have in fact been considering
developing
an added canonicalization scheme that is relatively more robust against a
broader set of things that cause breakage. His OpenDKIM has been developing
some data about a set. The list behaviors are part of that.
We haven't gotten into the technical detail yet.
I think a more interesting idea would be to use DOSETA to sign the MIME parts
instead of or in addition to the whole message. I’m starting to plan out an
implementation and will be looking for a couple of other sites interested in
conducting some experiments.
While I also think that's interesting to explore, I'm not so enamored of it
yet,
largely because I see it as likely to be too messy to be practical at scale.
But that's just intuition.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html