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