A data point from the perspective of an operating re-originating relay - a 
service that rewrites the recipient address, terminates the inbound signing 
chain, and issues a fresh originating DKIM signature outbound rather than 
extending the chain. 

On a corpus of 6186 inbound messages: header section size at the 50th 
percentile is 5630 octets, 90th 11420, 99th 16821. 35% of messages arrive above 
8KB. 64% carry 2 DKIM-Signature fields on arrival; 46% carry at least one 
ARC-Seal hop. In a DKIM2 deployment that overhead does not pass through - the 
relay re-originates from a clean slate.

Re-orgininator behavior has come up in the archive under various descriptions - 
“re-originator,” “alias service,” Vittorio’s “non-participating node” framing, 
the BCP’s own “personal alias service” mention in Section 5.4 - but the 
terminology section names only Originator, Forwarder, Reviser, and Receiver. 
Whether that gap matters for a BCP note on chain growth is a question. However, 
the concept appears to be in active use, it just does not yet have a 
name/definition.

William Weiner



From: Vittorio <[email protected]>
To: "Ietf Dkim"<[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2026 06:13:58 -0600
Subject: [Ietf-dkim] Re: BCP: operator note on header size limits and 
Message-Instance growth

 > Hello. 
 >  
 > A data point for this thread, measured rather than estimated. 
 >  
 > I measured the header section of every message in two mailboxes on one 
 > server, as delivered, counting from the start of the header block to the 
 > first empty line with CRLF terminators. The sample is 52104 messages 
 > received between 17 January 2024 and 7 October 2026. Two mailboxes on 
 > one server are not a representative sample of the Internet and I report 
 > it as what it is. The figures are the size as delivered, so they include 
 > the header fields added locally by the receiving system, no Recipes are 
 > present anywhere in the sample. 
 >  
 > Header section size, octets, whole sample: 
 >  
 > 50% of messages <= 2775 
 > 90% <= 5513 
 > 99% <= 11477 
 > largest 36480 
 >  
 > above 16384 octets: 227 messages 
 > above 24576 octets: 9 messages 
 > above 32768 octets: 1 message 
 >  
 > Split by the presence of a List-Id header field: 
 >  
 > without List-Id, n=39013: 50% <= 2555, 90% <= 4990, 99% <= 9170, largest 
 > 36480 
 > with List-Id, n=13091: 50% <= 2935, 90% <= 9518, 99% <= 17420, largest 
 > 30619 
 >  
 > The medians are close. At the 90th and 99th percentiles the mailing list 
 > traffic is about twice the size of the rest, which is where the long 
 > delivery paths are. The single largest header section in the sample is 
 > not a mailing list message. 
 >  
 > One piece of arithmetic on the per hop figure quoted earlier in this 
 > thread, 0.6 to 0.8 KB for a dual signature hop. Ten such hops added to 
 > the 131 mailing list messages above the 99th percentile would put all of 
 > them above 23000 octets and most of them above 24576. In the sample as 
 > it stands, nine messages out of 52104 exceed 24576. That figure covers 
 > signature material for a hop that forwards without modifying: a hop that 
 > modifies also adds a Message-Instance and where that carries removed 
 > content the growth is not bounded by any of the figures above. The 
 > arithmetic is therefore a floor. 
 >  
 > A failure rate of this order is low enough that it would not be 
 > recognised as a pattern, which matters when the failure mode is 
 > truncation without indication: the verification failure is attributed to 
 > the last signing hop, while the cause may be local to the receiver. 
 >  
 > Regards 
 > Vittorio Moccia 
 > _______________________________________________ 
 > Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] 
 > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 
 > 


_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to