ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] canonicalized null body and dkim

2006-12-15 11:42:54
Eric Allman wrote:

Um... to the best of my knowledge, sendmail will never strip any data, including trailing CRLFs. It will /add/ a CRLF under certain circumstances, which include when mailing to a local v7 mailer that requires a double CRLF between messages.

However, Tony is completely right about the ambiguity, except that it's actually larger than he says --- it appears the draft doesn't clearly specify whether you canonicalize then truncate, or truncate then canonicalize. The only one that actually makes sense from an interoperability sense is to canonicalize and then truncate. By this reading, l=0 would not include a trailing CRLF.

Is my logic logical?

I would this so.

One of the reasons I wrote the STRIP cl4n I-D was to normalize everything without <CR><LF> interoperabiliy known or unknown issues.

http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dkim/draft-santos-dkim-strip-00.txt

The STRIP c14n method is similar to the RELAXED c14n with the added step of removing the trailing white spaces in the hashing engine feed.

Anywho, I think it is vital that DKIM-BASE design issues with no documented ambiguities are squared away. DKIM is already too complex (and costly) for adoption considerations. Technical issues need to resolved.

---
HLS


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html