On Mon 29/Nov/2021 15:17:45 +0100 John R Levine wrote:
On Mon 29/Nov/2021 04:03:57 +0100 John Levine wrote:
This was part of the discussion about what sort of body modifications to
allow. We ended up with optionally ignoring white space changes, and l= to
ignore added text. My impression is that neither is useful. Very few
messages pass with relaxed canonicalization that don't also pass strict.
Using relaxed rather than strict is quite different between header and body.
It is fairly frequent to find reflowed headers, especially with MLM handling,
while bodies remain mostly untouched, except for CR additions and removals.
Of course, X-MIME-Autoconverted rewrite bodies beyond strict/ relaxed range.
(That's the original mistake.)
Well yeah, welcome to mail UNCOL land.
Those conversions used to afflict direct mail flows as well.
It'd be enough to add the subject tag on new messages to address the other
changes. Using l= works well with a wide range of mailing lists. However,
it only works with plain text.
I suppose if by wide range you mean lists that do not add subject tags and do
not handle html or multipart bodies. That may be common among nerd lists but
take a look beyond mailman and I don't think it is.
OTOH, it'd feel cringing to discuss the standardization of solutions to deal
with indirect mail flows using a mailing list where neither of those solutions
apply.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
