https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5891
--- Comment #2 from Mark Martinec <[email protected]> 2009-01-06 17:33:20 PST --- > As an alternative to adding a new field, it would be just as fine to > re-purpose a field awl.ip to carry either an IP addrress or a signer id. > As this field if very short (10 characters), tables would need to be > modified one way or another, so I chose a somewhat cleaner approach. Btw, with a r720963 ( https://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&rev=720963 )(on 2008-11-26) I have lengthened the awl.ip field to 45 characters, which was necessary to support IPv6 addresses. This opened a previously dismissed possibility of using the same awl.ip field for a signing domain when a message carries valid signature(s). It's probably still cleaner to use a separate field as the current code does - I just thought I should mention it. As a message can carry more than one valid DKIM signature, keeping multiple signing domains in one SQL field is still somewhat unclean from a point of view of a database design - storing signers in a separate table would be nicer. From a practical viewpoint, the current simpler solution suffices for the time being. Btw, is anybody (except me) running AWL on SQL with updated schema and 'auto_whitelist_distinguish_signed 1' ? -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
