On 30/Apr/10 19:58, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
From: asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely
We'd need to discuss the details, implement them, and test.
Anyone interested?
I'm up for the conversation, and OpenDKIM is a decent place to exercise a
well-considered alternative canonicalization scheme if the participants can
reach consensus. If something comes out of that which makes sense and works,
it becomes a candidate for standardization.
This just to note that a similar approach --considering MIME entities,
that Charles Lindsey called "a somewhat more aggressive
canonicalization"-- was introduced about October 2006 [CL1].
One month later, Charles wrote again [CL2], giving a proof of concept
in Perl [UNC]. Some of the WG responses may illuminate on why John
suggested to change list for this discussion...
But I have no illusions that any of that will be an easy trek, technically
I think we'd just need to find a suitable MIME library in C, and
experiment so as to come out with "an Internet Draft documenting a new
proposed canonicalization" (in Barry's words [BL]).
However, before possibly shifting to yet another list (opendkim-*), it
may be useful to discuss whether we want to limit signatures to parts
that won't be dropped, e.g. using l= or similar tag. For example,
alternative HTML text poses a difficulty, because either part can be
used, or dropped. How about adding a "part-hash" in each entity's header?
or politically.
I'd leave esoteric stuff to somebody else :-)
--
[CL1] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q4/006305.html
[CL2] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q4/006629.html
[UNC] http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl/uncode/uncode.html
[BL] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2006q4/006648.html
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg