Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic]

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 9/11/2014 10:34 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:
> Of the responses listed, the one that clearly works is to ask
> forwarders to forward messages, what the wiki calls "message
> wrapping." It works in the sense that the mail system sees consistent
> headers that pass all verifications, and represent the actual action
> of the remailer while not relying on Sender/From differences.

According to the criteria you list, sure.  According to what a recipient
sees, it works badly.  In terms of human communication, author
information is buried.


> At that point, the issue is mostly with the UI. If my reader did
> recognize the "simple forwarding" case from "authorized remailers,"
> then the message wrapping solution would be just fine. The good thing
> is that it is very much under my control.

This suggests defining a wrapping convention that is sufficiently
distinction so that receiving software can know it is this specific type
of wrapping and can choose to unwrap the message, without doing
unwrapping for other kinds of encapsulated mail.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net