On 05/19/2011 07:11 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 5/19/11 6:09 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
We send things that get forwarded through all kinds of manglers,
8bit manglers just being one variety. In the abstract, you can never
know
as a signer that a path is "clean"... it can always be forwarded. So
by your
argument it should be a MUST since you can never know.
(I'll assume here that you're using a loose definition for "forwarded"
and are really talking about either relaying or resending. Forwarding
in the usual sense is not something that DKIM *should* survive.)
Yes.
But that creates
the silly-state of DKIM wagging the 8bit SMTP tail, which is a wrong
outcome.
I'm not sure what you mean here. What is the "right" outcome?
DKIM should never be in the position of dictating what is "right"
for the email world at large. If that world says that 8 bit is a
Good Thing, it would be a pretty ridiculous situation to have
DKIM being the impediment: it's a tail wagging the dog situation
which is always a wrong outcome.
Like I said, this is sort of academic... I don't think we're in any
huge danger here :)
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html