On 10/10/2009 10:12 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > >>>> People who contribute to mailing lists shouldn't say dkim=all. We >>>> argued this ad nauseam when we were hammering out ADSP, it shouldn't >>>> come as a surprise to anyone. >>> That is not true at all. They shouldn't be using discardable. "All" only >>> says what the sender does, not what the receiver should expect. >> >> They certainly shouldn't be using discardable. I would advise not using >> all either, due to the observed tendency of people to pay way too much >> attention to DKIM and ADSP failures. > > > Folks, > > To claim that one signs all mail is to imply that anyone receiving mail from > them should see a valid signature.
It most certainly does not. > Mail sent through list servers invites the problem of receivers getting mail > that does not have the promised valid signature, since intermediaries are > re-posting the message and are free to make whatever changes they see fit. "All" doesn't "promise" anything of the sort. > Hence, saying -all for mail that goes through intermediaries which might > affect > the signature is inviting receivers to treat the received mail with hostile > prejudice. It certainly doesn't help when one of the authors of the document doesn't know what "all" means. Mike _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
