Roland Turner wrote: >> > Surely the stance of a dkim=discardable sender is that it is absolutely > OK to discard affected messages if there is any reason at all for doubt > and that, therefore, "non-participant" MLMs aren't, actually, breaking > anything.
There's some risk that what a list thinks might be unrecoverable is not. I guess I don't see it as being especially valuable to do anything heroic in the middle of the mail path (= forwarders) rather than letting it be done end to end (where end=delivery domain). The amount of traffic here is tiny, and asking MLM's to do just about anything is in reality asking for very fragmented adoption. So what's the use? Getting MLM's to resign actually does something useful because you can attach its reputation to the message. But adoption will be spotty for years to come even if it's in their advantage. Mike _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html