On Wed 20/Aug/2025 19:28:37 +0200 Phillip Tao wrote:
I must've missed this in my earlier readings of RFC 6376, but 2.1 and 2.2 actually do explicitly list MUAs as potential signers and verifiers.
The messages of this list that have MUA in the subject were still sent to mipassoc. One thread is this:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/0g_0UerfPJENFsYSg4LZRRHqN2c/
[...] I believe DKIM 2's diff algebra should be sufficient to solve issue 2.
Hm... I think when I implement this feature I'll only want to apply it to messages I forward from the server. Client forwarding doesn't actually need to preserve DKIM signatures. So, unless supporting client-side verification becomes mandatory, diff headers won't be created for changes applied by the MDA.
Best Ale -- _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
