>A more interesting case to consider is acm.org style forwarders, >where the forwarder is, in many ways, the final destination, and where >the address at the forwarder is "owned" by the final recipient, and >where they will likely ask for transactional mail of the sort that >senders might consider discardable be sent.
Our working hypothesis has been that most forwarders of that sort won't break the signature, so it's not a problem. The flame wars erupt when you ask who, if anyone, should sign mail from domains like acm.org that are sent from a thousand random networks around the world where ACM members happen to get their mail. R's, u...@acm.org _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
