> On Feb 22, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Jim Popovitch <jim...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 1:46 PM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: >>>> IMHO, Mailman should strip the existing DKIM header and Mailop.org should >>>> sign anew. >>> >>> Yes! That is the perfect and proper way, despite some rants by less >>> experienced mailinglist operators. >> >> Hi. I've been running mailing lists since the late 1970s and having >> actually read the DKIM specs and written a fair amount of DKIM code, I >> know that stripping signatures makes no difference unless someone's >> mail filters are breathtakingly broken. > > But leaving the DKIM signatures provides what actual value with modern > MLMs (i.e. not .forward files, etc.) ?
The same value as most of the other trace headers - debugging problems after the fact. "This mail was apparently DKIM signed when sent by the original author" (probably) isn't terribly useful to automation, but it is for human debugging. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
