> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen J. Turnbull [mailto:step...@xemacs.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 6:49 PM
> To: Murray S. Kucherawy
> Cc: mailman-developers@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs
>
> That's not true for Mailman topics,
Murray S. Kucherawy writes:
> Essentially to be "DKIM-friendly" you're free to make any changes
> you want to the message so long as they are confined to those parts
> of the message not "covered" by the DKIM signature. So if a
> signature doesn't cover Subject:, you're fine. Obviously there
> -Original Message-
> From: Barry Warsaw [mailto:ba...@list.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 8:30 AM
> To: Murray S. Kucherawy
> Cc: mailman-developers@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs
>
> For Mailman, I think we'd like to, and would ge
On Oct 12, 2011, at 02:46 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>The IETF recently issued an RFC, with BCP status, regarding interaction
>between DKIM and MLMs. It seems like this community might be interested.
>
>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6377.txt
>
>Long ago I mentioned on this list that the IETF was
