Dave Cridland wrote:
On Wed Aug 3 22:44:27 2011, Tony Hansen wrote:
PS. I do my sorting based on the To/Cc field as much as anything.
I do Sieve to assign IMAP keywords based on the List-Id header field
which my MUA then uses to colourize differently in the summary listing
based on the settings it finds in ACAP.
Do I win?
(I'm largely against subject prefixes, but not sufficient to jump up and
down about).
+1, In theory I am against any mail alterations. But the list tag has
helped MUAs that do not have rules filtering or the user is not savvy
enough to figure out. We avoided it for a long time in our list
server product, and when it was finally added, it became and remain
very popular. It is now the default setup for a new list.
I will say today, more MUA are aware of mailing list with automated
unsubscribe features (by looking at the 5322.List-XXXXX added
headers). I personally use these to separate folders since the
subject tag may be turned off by the server.
Some Negatives:
When DKIM was introduced, a mail integrity technology, now needed to
work with a natural mail integrity breaking system. Even though DKIM
offered a body tag (l=) feature to help exclude list footer text in
the body hash verification process, changing the subject tag broke
original signatures.
List resigners help alleviate this issue, but at the expense of losing
original DKIM integrity information opening a loop hole for security
concerns and potential interoperability issues with submission
downlinks (members) with DKIM security support.
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf