On Wednesday 12 December 2007 12:28, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, SM wrote: > > The milter would have to emulate sendmail's behavior on signing. > > ...which is unfortunately non-trivial to achieve. sendmail was written at > a time when pretty-izing a message was acceptable, or in fact even > preferred, behaviour for an MTA. Unfortunately DKIM is an application > where that feature is rather undesirable. > > In addition to these rewrites, we've already added provisional code to > dkim-filter for space-after-colon munging and things like the "masquerade" > and "genericstable" features. There are probably others we've not yet > encountered.
>From an interoperability perspective, I think it would be very useulf if all of the Sendmail interoperability considerations you are implmenenting were sufficiently well documented that other DKIM implementers could make similar changes. Even if Sendmail released an update tomorrow that fixed all these issues, the current code base will be in service for a long time and so it would make sense generally to work around these kinds of problems. No one else is in nearly as a good a position to figure out how to work through Sendmail DKIM issues. Scott K ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ dkim-milter-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dkim-milter-discuss
