> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:ietf-dkim- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:13 AM > To: John Levine > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists should > strip DKIM signatures > > On 04/27/2010 08:06 AM, John Levine wrote: > >>> Another real question, equally important: who is actually writing this > BCP? > > > >> Is it something that would make sense to add to the Development, > >> Deployment and Operations document? > > > > It would probably be better to keep it separate, since it's likely to > > be more contentious than everything else in that document combined. > > > > Oh, and I'll write it, just not this week. > > > I'd suggest that the author should be outside of the set of contenders. > > Mike >
I would suggest several authors. While I appreciate and respect John's perspective, I think there are other cases besides phishing which he has not considered. Misinformation and damage to reputation are two that come to mind. The fact that a domain (or author within a domain) wishes to protect themselves by signing what they write should not be discounted. This should be true even (or particularly) when what they write or emit passes through a mail list. I get the sense that some discount what is communicated to/through a list compared to what is sent directly. I'm not sure why that is so. Mike _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
