It appears that Bron Gondwana <[email protected]> said: >> I'm not clear about the logic by which we can assume that IETF MLs will >> promptly adopt DKIM2 but will ignore DKOR. Since DKOR is much simpler, it >> sounds more likely people will adopt it more quickly than DKIM2. >> > >Unless I mis-understood it, DKOR wouldn't be applied by the IETF MLs because >they aren't the initiator of the message. DKOR is >very lightly specified, so I may have misread that. > >Certainly the IETF list is not currently adding a DKIM signature. This >message that I am replying to has a single >DKIM-Signature header field, with `d=tata.it`.
That's a configuration bug that happened when we moved to the new server. We're working on it. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
