I understand that you, me and Mark have a vested interest in DKIM qua DKIM,
but I think we're outliers. What's unclear to me is what mailops and/or
ARF-consuming boxen intend to do with this data.

Mike, and you passed on BARF as the name of the WG? Shame!

On 02/24/2010 10:06 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:ietf-dkim-
>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 9:47 AM
>> To: Mark Delany
>> Cc: IETF DKIM WG
>> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Broken signature analysis
>>
>> But I guess this all rather begs the question about what people intend
>> to
>> do with those breakage stats and/or analysis.
>
> I've been using several approaches to solve these problems.
>
> Basically I have two debugging modes.  In the first mode I enable "z=" tags 
> on signing (or ask the sender to do so) and then wait for a failure; if the 
> "bh" matches then "z=" will contain enough information to identify the 
> problem, otherwise you have to move to the second mode.  OpenDKIM can be 
> compiled to make some attempt to figure out what changed in this case by 
> using the library equivalent of "agrep" (approximate grep) to try to find 
> similar header fields in the "z=" block and what the receiver actually got.
>
> In the second mode, I enable debugging flags on both ends of the connection 
> that save the canonicalized header and body, and then collect and "diff" to 
> see what changed (or spot canonicalization errors).  This can be automated, 
> but the data collection part is tough because it requires co-operation of 
> both ends.  The "r=" (reporting address) tag that the WG chose not to pursue 
> has been extremely useful here.
>
> And in terms of general deployment statistics and observations about overall 
> success, OpenDKIM has a statistics mode that we will be encouraging people to 
> enable and report back to us periodically, and we will relay data from 
> willing participants to the working group once the WG gets to that point.

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to