On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:13:02 +0100, Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> WTF is the point of inserting an A-R header if you are not willing to >> take responsibility for what you have done by signing it? >> >> And why should anyone else believe your A-R if you have omitted that >> elementary step? > > Because, if you've followed the RFC defining it, the border MTA has > removed any others present that could possibly be misinterpreted by > internal agents. Yes, but that is the MTA at MY border. I would expect the assessor at MY border to have indicated some degree of suspicion if the A_R header it was about to remove (before substituting its own) was not included in the signature that accompanied it. > > You're not required to sign them, but it's not a bad idea. Then why are people on this list not trying to enocourage that good practice? Indeed, why are they so vociferously trying to DIScourage it? -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: [email protected] snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5 _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
