Re: [dmarc-ietf] interoperability issues around gateway-transformation

2015-03-19 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
There was one proposed: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kucherawy-dkim-list-canon-00 This working group will be discussing this and other options before long. -MSK On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, John Bucy jb...@google.com wrote: I was glad to see mention of content-transfer-encoding

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Next steps for RFC 7489 (DMARC)

2015-03-19 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Terry Zink tz...@exchange.microsoft.com wrote: If bulk email providers have shown no interest in promoting a solution, why do we think they'd latch onto this new non-aligned header field as a solution? +1. And since the From field is the only one users

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Next steps for RFC 7489 (DMARC)

2015-03-19 Thread Douglas Otis
On Mar 18, 2015, at 4:38 PM, Terry Zink tz...@exchange.microsoft.com wrote: Based upon the almost complete lack of interest of bulk email providers at promoting a solution, it seems the path forward is to define a new non-aligned header field able to retain the author role information,

[dmarc-ietf] interoperability issues around gateway-transformation

2015-03-19 Thread John Bucy
I was glad to see mention of content-transfer-encoding issues in draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability since gateway-transformation breaks dkim signatures. Is there any interest in trying to develop a mime-aware canonicalization for dkim? cheers john ___