John R. Levine wrote: >> You're assuming that how end-users sort list messages is the same >> as how DKIM verifiers might operate on list messages. Is that a >> good assumption? Or do you mean something else when you say >> "sort"? >> > > I suppose I could go back and specifically ask people how their spam > filters handle list mail as opposed to how they sort it, but I'd be rather > surprised if the answers were different. We're pretty high end users > here, in my case the filtering and the sorting are intermixed and I doubt > I'm the only one in that situation. > > My point is simple: everyone handles mail from lists using the identity of > the list, not the identity of the contributor.
Why do you simplify handling of list mail to sorting and filtering, ignoring two other important list handling activities: 1. reading mail 2. responding to mail In both activities the From address (and possibly other fields like Reply-To and Sender) plays an important role. From a recipients point of view I'm not interested in what path the mail of John has travelled to my Inbox. And maybe the question boils down to what is DKIM: are we only interested to asap jump from DKIM to domain reputation, or do we also see the domain assertion statement in the DKIM spec: <quote> The ultimate goal of this framework is to permit a signing domain to assert responsibility for a message, thus protecting message signer identity and the integrity of the messages they convey while retaining the functionality of Internet email as it is known today. </quote> > Despite three decades of > experience with mailing lists, arguments to the contrary say "someone > might" rather than "we do".* > > I hope we all agree that it is a waste of our time to design complicated > mechanisms to solve problems that don't actually exist. > I fully agree. /rolf _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
