On Thursday 04 January 2007 14:18, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
The rules are very clear, MUST can only be used in cases when breaking the
rule will inevitably produce incompatibility.
Speculation that breaking the rule might produce incompatibility is not
enough. RFC 2119 is very clear.
From my perspective having a message have a valid signature with one
implementation and having a broken signature with another is an
incompatibility. I don't think that's speculation. I think it's the clear
and obvious result of trying to reconstruct the original content and seeing
if a valid signature can be extracted based on a process not specified.
I think what we are discussing here qualifies as an incompatibility.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html