Steve Jenkins wrote:
> How about some integration with Amavis-new? That seems to be an
> extremely popular "front-end" for mail processors, and I know they're
> tinkering with DKIM stuff in there, although I didn't really look that
> hard at exactly what it was doing DKIM-wise when I set it up.
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Apart from that they're two filters that analyze a message and report
> a verdict of sorts.
Murray is right, both are just filters. Each of them is capable of
signing and verifying DKIM signatures on its own. I don't see any
opportunity or need for integration, but I do see it as a benefit
of having two independent DKIM implementations: in the past one or
the other helped reveal problems in the other implementation,
benefiting us all. Also a little competition does not hurt :)
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> Amavisd has been massively updated with the 2.7 release series (pre14
> is the current build) to support both signing and verification for DKIM.
Agreed that 2.7 pre-releases are pretty stable and popular, but
the DKIM signing and verification was already provided by version
2.6.0, back in April 2008. Details at 2.6.0 release notes, and at
http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/amavisd-new-docs.html#dkim
> I would use on, or the other, of OpenDKIM and Amavis, to handle
> the DKIM tasks, but not both, nor would I use a mix of them.
Agreed, use one or the other: if amavisd (and SpamAssassin) is already
in use, then use its DKIM capabilities, otherwise go for OpenDKIM.
OpenDKIM is better geared towards sendmail (but works with Postfix too),
while amavisd is better geared towards Postfix (but works with sendmail too).
Running both is possible, but there is no need to complicate one's life.
Mark
Received on Thu Mar 03 2011 - 10:59:48 PST