> -----Original Message----- > From: mailman-developers-bounces+msk=cloudmark....@python.org > [mailto:mailman-developers-bounces+msk=cloudmark....@python.org] On Behalf Of > Barry Warsaw > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 3:43 PM > To: mailman-developers@python.org > Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs > > >> >This also looks like a candidate for, say, a List-Approved-Date > >> >header. > > > >It's not available in RFC 2369. We will have to propose 'List-Approved-Date' > >as a new standard. Should we?
I've got a separate draft that adds to Received: fields a tag that indicates transitions of messages into administrative hold states (quarantining, timed delivery and list moderation are included in the initial list of reasons) ready to go. I just missed the -00 submission deadline prior to the next IETF meeting in November, so it's not in the IETF datatracker but it is here: http://www.blackops.org/~msk/draft-kucherawy-received-state.txt. Comments welcome. The idea: When the MLM selects a message for moderation it would a Received: field with such a tag, and then on release the next MTA in the chain adds another Received: as per normal which, presumably, completes the handling chain in a way that the end user can see what happened (i.e., when it entered the hold and when it came out). This doesn't include a mechanism for tracking who did the approval, but you've got that separately on your list anyway. -MSK _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
