Ignorance is bliss, I guess, especially when it comes to pontificates.
That's what every implementation of DKIM for MTA's, both open source and
commercial that I'm aware of does, though some do and don't do the ADSP
lookup. News at 11: email is still delivered, with little to no observable
impact.
You're a big fan of telling people that running code is your friend.
gunzip opendkim and see for yourself.
Mike, next we'll hear that DNSBL lookups can't be done during SMTP time
either I guess
On 09/27/2010 08:07 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
> OK, so during the SMTP session, more particularly during the interval
> between receiving the dot at the end of data and returning a status
> code, my SMTP daemon needs to:
>
> * identify recipient addresses that are mailing lists
>
> * look for DKIM signatures in the message header
>
> * find the From: address
>
> * if there's a signature with a d= that matches the From: address, do
> the calculations to generate the DKIM hash, fetch the key record from
> the DNS, and see if it's good
>
> * if there's not a good author signature, fetch the ADSP record and see
> what it says
>
> * if it says discardable, return 5xx
>
> * otherwise return 2xx
>
> That seems an awful lot of work to do with the connection open to deal
> with what is unlikely to be more than a rare misconfiguration. When you
> made these changes to your MTA, how much work was it? How much effect
> did it have on overall MTA performance? If you haven't implemented them,
> why not?
>
> And since this group seems to be obsessed with arcane corner cases, what
> do you do with a discardable message if it's sent to two addresses, one
> of which is a mailing list and one of which isn't?
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
