[Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Murray S. Kucherawy writes:

 > I don't have a reality suspension field in effect on this topic.  I
 > was simply disputing the claim that complying with the
 > List-Unsubscribe RFC constitutes "hiding" of those details.

It's not deliberate, let alone malicious, but it does conceal the
details from the user's view, both in current practice (where few MUAs
-- at least weighted by user count -- implement reasonable handling of
those headers) and in reasonable implementations of the RFC (as in the
part of my post that you snipped).

 > I don't claim MLMs are broken in this regard, but I do think some
 > more modern thinking by all components is in order.

I agree, and have no objection to advocacy, or to RFCs that take
advantage of more modern thinking.  But that's very different from
arguing that a defect in the DKIM RFC is really a problem of the
implementations.