ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=

2006-04-20 18:43:01
*If* we're going to switch away from "seconds from 1970", we should use
the standardized time format described in RFC 3339: Date and Time on the
Internet: Timestamps. IMHO, using anything else would be irresponsible.

However, I don't think we have to switch.

        Tony Hansen
        tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com

Douglas Otis wrote:

On Apr 20, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:

Jim Fenton wrote:

I'm not sure I want to start another discussion about the "t=" tag like
we had about the "x=" tag, but I'm even less sure what to do with t=.
Do we want to base the format on that of t=?

Do statistics and forensics count for nothing these days?

From a prior conversation, I think the concern was whether to use
seconds from 1970 or the RFC2822 date time format.  Standardizing on a
consistent format with that of the other headers being examined would
also permit a recipient to understand what the time stamp value
represents.  The conversion routines are already be available.

The draft could recommend encompassing an evaluated Date header within
the signature, or providing for a human readable t= time stamp when the
Date header differs significantly.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html