On 3/26/25 11:02 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 9:31 AM Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:
It's a matter of MTA design. The closer the specification adheres
to SMTP, the
wider the implementation choices.
I think about this differently:
Right now, you could implement STD 76 DKIM via a pipeline. The only
thing it needs as input is a message. An MTA could pipe a message as
it comes over the wire in the DATA block to a signer or verifier and
it would work.
Requiring any part of the envelope, or knowledge of SMTP routing, is a
significant departure and means this simple "pipe the pure message"
interface can't work. You need something more complex; significantly,
you need the envelope, and you need to clone the routing logic from
the MTA to the filter (or build it into the MTA directly).
AKA "layering violation". That's on what is being proposed here, not on
SMTP. Made worse by constricting perfectly valid SMTP behavior.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
