On May 9, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
And after that I'd
suggest devoting some energy to an implementation white paper,
Comments on the Deployment draft
<http://dkim.org/ietf-dkim.htm#deployment>
are eagerly sought!
and
possibly another interoperability workshop to make sure various
implementations are completely up to spec with -bis.
that could be interesting.
Yup. Some validation of signature structure would be good too -
I think some signing implementations may be out of spec, but work anyway
because the crypto libraries used by the receiving implementations
are flexible enough to recognize the format, even if it's not the one
they're expecting.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html