Just a side note...
On 13/11/2024 21:14, Dave Crocker wrote:
Emails also often flow indirectly through these networks, undergoing
redirection, expansion into multiple copies via aliases and mailing
lists, as well as rewriting and filtering before eventually arriving
at a mailbox or being processed by a receiving software agent.
While 'indirect' has well-established context in many email technical
circles, I believe it does not have clear, consistent, and precise
meaning. So it needs to be defined here, with more than an example.
I see this is an extremely important point, since the movement that has
taken place with email is to consider tight integration of domain name
and sending platform, in substantial contrast with the way email worked
for perhaps 40 years. That is, 'indirect' is tending to be treated as
almost aberrant, or at least as problematic.
I prefer the latter term, "problematic", rather than "aberrant" or,
according to the upcoming SMTP standard, "misguided".
Sadly, Section 3.4 of rfc5321bis doesn't define forwarding any better.
Its definition of what "can be treated as a continuation of email
transit" is overly strict. In particular, forwarding that is limited to
the set of modifications and actions described there never breaks
typical DKIM signatures.
Reality differs. DMARC's alignment requirement is an attempt at
capturing the concept of legitimacy. I'd consider that email worked
well at the beginning of that 40 years period, when every operator was
legit. Later on, the amount of guesswork required to filter became so
shattering that many an operator gave up running their own servers.
I agree it's problematic.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
