Incoming SMTP in the year 2017 and absence of DKIM

Grant Taylor gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net
Fri Dec 1 02:35:05 CST 2017


On 11/30/2017 06:47 PM, John Levine wrote:
> I suppose that would make sense for the 0.1% of mailing lists run by 
> people with the skill and interest to hack on their list software.

I guess I'm in the 0.1% then.

> ATPS was an experiment that failed.  Nobody uses it, it didn't scale.

That's sort of what I've gathered.

> I can't help but note the absence of S/MIME signatures on roughly 100% 
> of all of the messages in this thread.

I believe that's because the mailing list strips non-text MIME parts, 
including the S/MIME signatures.

> Yeah, that's what ARC is intended to do.

Hum.  My understanding of ARC is that it's a way for a server to assert 
things about what it received.  -  Where as my interpretation of what we 
were discussing is the sender authorizing intermediary MTAs to send the 
message.  The former is after the fact, and the latter is before hand.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3982 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20171130/7b1f0126/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list