On 26 Dec 2016, at 11:31, tom p. wrote:
I believe that this does not invalid the origin DKIM signature, so I see
the criterion as always modifying messages but not in a way that
invalids DKIM signatures.
Bingo! What should have been some kind of requirement is to define the method
of signing the content of portions of a message with some BCP for mailing lists.
The stress, if I may call it that, today for DKIM is that the signing is not in
sync with how mailing lists are run.
paf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature