[Bug 5891] Let AWL keep separate records for DKIM-signed and unsigned mail

[bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org]

https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5891





--- Comment #2 from Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>  2009-01-06 17:33:20 PST ---
> As an alternative to adding a new field, it would be just as fine to
> re-purpose a field awl.ip to carry either an IP addrress or a signer id.
> As this field if very short (10 characters), tables would need to be
> modified one way or another, so I chose a somewhat cleaner approach.

Btw, with a r720963 ( https://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&rev=720963 )(on 2008-11-26) I have lengthened the awl.ip field
to 45 characters, which was necessary to support IPv6 addresses.
This opened a previously dismissed possibility of using the same awl.ip
field for a signing domain when a message carries valid signature(s).
It's probably still cleaner to use a separate field as the current
code does - I just thought I should mention it.

As a message can carry more than one valid DKIM signature, keeping
multiple signing domains in one SQL field is still somewhat unclean
from a point of view of a database design - storing signers in a
separate table would be nicer. From a practical viewpoint, the
current simpler solution suffices for the time being.

Btw, is anybody (except me) running AWL on SQL with updated schema
and  'auto_whitelist_distinguish_signed 1'  ?


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.