[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ih] bounce notifications and archive status
- Subject: [ih] bounce notifications and archive status
- From: internet-history at elists.isoc.org (John Levine via Internet-history)
- Date: 13 Nov 2019 14:36:41 -0500
- In-reply-to: <20191113182813.sg-Nv%[email protected]>
In article <20191113182813.sg-Nv%steffen at sdaoden.eu> you write:
>But DKIM has to go over individual parts of the entire message (in
>practice), so the implementations cannot be as simple as "we dig
>anything until the first all-empty line, and do not care for
>actual content, the rest we do not care about at all".
>That is, i claim that putting it all in an envelope would not
>increase the cost of computation compared to status quo.
Mail servers are invariably I/O bound. Compute cost was not
a concern at all when we were designing DKIM.
>It seems i am at odds again, however, since simply enwrapping
>anything within a signed envelope would have been the right
>approach also there.
What MUA do you use? When we were trying to figure out what
anti-DMARC hack to use on the IETF's mailing lists I tried every
variation of MIME message wrapping I could think of, and without
exception, they all rendered badly in the MUAs that people use.
S/MIME barely works, any other kind of message wrapping is hopeless.
The point of DKIM is to add signatures in a way that won't screw up
the way the user handles her mail, and that will be robust in the face
of benign changes that happen to mail as it's relayed. Given the
decades of installed base, I think we did about as well as we could.
Internet-history mailing list
Internet-history at elists.isoc.org