Dave Crocker wrote: >> But in the worst case, the list has simply invalidated the signature, >> and we say that this SHOULD be considered equivalent to no signature >> at all. Absent SSP, this is no bad thing. > > I am inclined to agree. However the [] behavior is rather common. So > we probably should consider whether it is reasonable to have DKIM > contain features that are intended to allow a signature survive > mailing list transit, when we know that the final result will usually > fail.
Is this one case where DKIM could have an impact on list configuration behavior? Eliot _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
