Charles Lindsey wrote:
How DKIM will work in an EAI context is not yet clear. For messages
which remain in an EAI (aka UTF8SMTP) environment throughout their
journey, DKIM should work OK, provided implemetors heed the advice in
dkim-base to maintain 8bit cleanliness in strings. But if a UTF8SMTP
message has to be downgraded by some MTA en route, then secondary
signing by that MTA is just not an option. ...
It occurs to me that this is probably not a DKIM topic at all. I don't mean
that it isn't relevant to DKIM, but rather that it is not *specific* to DKIM.
EAI is a long-standing problem and canonicalization of email text is a
long-standing issue. I suspect that your focus is appropriate to a venue with
that mix of interest, rather than DKIM, per se.
Let me suggest this more strongly: These arenas of internationalization and
canonicalization have proved exceptionally difficult and the sort of thing you
are attempting to pursue *should* be of benefit -- and therefore interest -- to
the larger email text-handling community.
That said, I'm not sure what venue to suggest, and I don't want to guess, lest
it confuse things further.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html