On Fri, Jun 5, 2026 at 6:18 AM Vittorio <[email protected]> wrote: > This > proposal does not ask to sign all X-* headers. It asks the working group > to converge on a fixed subset of X-* headers related to spam > classification, virus scanning and delivery tracking that should be > included in the signed set. >
It seems odd to me to give any kind of standards track endorsement to X-* fields and their semantics when a BCP discourages their use and registration. If there are X-* fields that universally mean something, especially across ADMD boundaries, and see enough use to be of interest, maybe they should be standardized in their non-X-* forms. If they have value to DKIM2 and there's enough momentum (and it seems there may well be), people will adapt. -MSK
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
