Hi, >> Then shouldn't it just be eliminated as a rule entirely? There are >> also rules that apparently depend on it: > > No, the DKIM_VERIFIED (or rather: DKIM_VALID, as it is now called) > (with a near-zero score) is valuable for two reasons: in combination > with other rules adds flexibility to whitelisting-type of rules, and > provides a quick-glance information when checking a log file.
Shouldn't then L_UNVERIFIED_GMAIL be updated to rely upon DKIM_VALID instead of the deprecated DKIM_VERIFIED? >> It looks like perhaps it's there for legacy reasons? From 25_dkim.cf: >> # old, declared for compatibility with pre-3.3, should have scores 0 >> full DKIM_VERIFIED eval:check_dkim_valid() >> tflags DKIM_VERIFIED net nice > > It acquired a more appropriately named alias DKIM_VALID, with the > same meaning. Newer rules use the new name. The old one still works, > so old rules are not broken by this renaming. Okay, I think I understand. Thanks for clarifying. Thanks, Alex
