Barry Leiba wrote:
Is the requirement that DKIM support both
822/2822 content (822 being the current standard) or is the intent
that DKIM is just required to support 2822 content?
I believe there are two parts to the answer to that:
1. We refer to RFC 282x, as the current standard, and that's what we're
aiming to support.
2. We're trying, to the extent we reasonably can, to deal with most of
what's actually out there, ...
Does anyone think that's not the right answer?
I think your language describes things quite nicely.
I am pretty sure that DKIM does not have anything that cares about 822 vs. 2822.
That is, it works for both.
So I have tended to view the dual-reference approach as a means of communicating
to folks that they do not have to worry about old-vs-new specifications for
message syntax/semantics.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html