Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread valdis . kletnieks
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:46:05 -0800, Michael Thomas said: > Apparently the levine unit is hearing things again because nobody -- > least of all me -- has > said anything about arc. I believe it was a pre-emptive statement. pgp2H7Fy1I06i.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Michael Thomas
On 11/29/2017 01:11 PM, John Levine wrote: PPS: Please spare us pontification about why ARC can't possibly work unless you're prepared to cite section numbers in the ARC spec supporting your argument. Apparently the levine unit is hearing things again because nobody -- least of all me -- has

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Michael Thomas
On 11/29/2017 03:00 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: On 11/29/2017 03:46 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: You know what the original header was via the signature. You can take the delta of the current subject line and remove any additions and validate the signature. Whether you're happy with the

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Grant Taylor via NANOG
On 11/29/2017 03:46 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: You know what the original header was via the signature. You can take the delta of the current subject line and remove any additions and validate the signature. Whether you're happy with the additions is a different concern, Are you referring to

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Michael Thomas
On 11/29/2017 02:40 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: On 11/29/2017 03:24 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: Message footers and subject lines can be dealt with. That's already been proven within the current DKIM spec. Please humor my ignorance and explain how a subject line (which is (over)signed)

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Grant Taylor via NANOG
On 11/29/2017 03:24 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: Message footers and subject lines can be dealt with. That's already been proven within the current DKIM spec. Please humor my ignorance and explain how a subject line (which is (over)signed) can be dealt with in the current DKIM spec? I get how

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread Michael Thomas
On 11/29/2017 01:11 PM, John Levine wrote: In article <1d458e76-ab61-db28-79cb-6aabcab4f...@mtcc.com> you write: I've been saying for years that it should be possible to create the concept of DKIM-friendly mailing lists. ... I suppose, if your users are OK with no subject tags, message

Re: lists and DMARC and ARC, was Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

2017-11-29 Thread John Levine
In article <1d458e76-ab61-db28-79cb-6aabcab4f...@mtcc.com> you write: >I've been saying for years that it should be possible to create the >concept of DKIM-friendly mailing lists. ... I suppose, if your users are OK with no subject tags, message footers, or any of the other cruft that list users