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

[Richard Damon]

On 10/25/11 6:00 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen J. Turnbull [mailto:stephen at xemacs.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 2:50 AM
>> To: Murray S. Kucherawy
>> Cc: mailman-developers at python.org
>> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs
>>
>> 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.
> Well, I also don't agree with characterizing this as a defect in the DKIM RFC.
>
I would consider an RFC that tells some people they need to violate the 
laws of their country to follow it to have a defect.

Their are places, like Germany has been mentioned, where bulk mailers, 
like Mailing Lists, need to place in a prominent place unsubscription 
instructions.

It is a fact, that in the current state of software, the 
LIST-UNSUBSCRIBE header is not likely to be seen by a typical user.

Therefore, the only legal place to put the required notice is in the 
body of the message.

Now, if 90+% of people would see the LIST-UNSUBSCRIBE header someone 
might be able to make a case that the few who didn't should have been 
able to see it, but with Current MUAs it isn't seen. I suspect that 
(way) less than 10% of people would see the LIST-UNSUBSCRIBE header 
unless they went looking for it. Is there even an MUA that by default 
will show it? How many people have MUAs that can even be easily 
configured to show this header and not all headers? I can think of a few 
that can be configured to add arbitrary headers to the default show 
list, but these are not the ones used by most people, but I am not sure 
if I can think of one that knows about this header so you can add it 
without having to personally know about it.