[Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at cloudmark.com
Sat Oct 29 08:45:12 CEST 2011
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailman-developers-bounces+msk=cloudmark.com at python.org [mailto:mailman-developers-bounces+msk=cloudmark.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Barry Warsaw
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 3:43 PM
> To: mailman-developers at python.org
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs
> >> >This also looks like a candidate for, say, a List-Approved-Date
> >> >header.
> >It's not available in RFC 2369. We will have to propose 'List-Approved-Date'
> >as a new standard. Should we?
I've got a separate draft that adds to Received: fields a tag that indicates transitions of messages into administrative hold states (quarantining, timed delivery and list moderation are included in the initial list of reasons) ready to go. I just missed the -00 submission deadline prior to the next IETF meeting in November, so it's not in the IETF datatracker but it is here: http://www.blackops.org/~msk/draft-kucherawy-received-state.txt. Comments welcome.
The idea: When the MLM selects a message for moderation it would a Received: field with such a tag, and then on release the next MTA in the chain adds another Received: as per normal which, presumably, completes the handling chain in a way that the end user can see what happened (i.e., when it entered the hold and when it came out).
This doesn't include a mechanism for tracking who did the approval, but you've got that separately on your list anyway.
More information about the Mailman-Developers