MBOX-Line: From Pidgeot18 at verizon.net  Sun Mar 15 08:05:46 2015
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.net>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:54 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] DKIM signatures on this list
In-Reply-To: <55050A00.60405@brokersys.com>
References: <20150313211600.25485.qmail@ary.lan>
	<alpine.LSU.2.20.1503131631020.2099@linux-0rhy>
	<CAC4RtVA-D1_yvYb8LOsN+ed7J=SyGNp3qEvgTsW=Gxst4xCw1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<55050A00.60405@brokersys.com>
Message-ID: <55059FCA.8000006@verizon.net>

On 3/14/2015 11:26 PM, Jonathan Guthrie wrote:
> Beyond that, and beyond the procedures necessary to set it up, I have 
> no knowledge of DKIM.  I have no idea why Mr Levine assumes that 
> because I have a passing familiarity with RFC 3501 and RFC 2822 that I 
> will necessarily have detailed knowledge of the contents of RFC 6376.  
> Upon reading his emails and reflecting on how such things work, I do 
> understand that a lack of signature is semantically equivalent to an 
> invalid signature, but I don't understand why there is an assumption 
> that this knowledge should be intuitively obvious to the casual 
> observer, even on a list such as this.

If you're going to complain about people doing the wrong thing and 
breaking the specification, common sense says that you should understand 
what the specification actually says you're supposed to be doing.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth


