On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 4:31 PM Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 11/26/2022 3:20 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > I will say that the use case that is broken by removing the signature
> > is the "re-send" case, where the MUA or some other post-delivery agent
> > (perhaps a sieve script) re-introduces the message with a different
> > RCPT TO but the same MAIL FROM and "From:".
>
> Post-delivery survival of the signature is not only not a goal, it is
> arguably (or possibly demonstrably) a problem.
>

Can we say more about this if we're going to take that position?  A naked
"not a goal" doesn't jive with RFC 4686, which explicitly says it is a
goal, or at least that it was one.

I guess that means it comes down to making an argument about what
experience has shown us: Does Barry's use case, plus the Thunderbird
plug-in use case, together carry more weight than the perceived problem
that replay causes?

Also, a reminder that the WG hasn't actually rechartered yet; maybe some of
these debates should wait until that's happened.

-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim

Reply via email to