-----Original Message-----
From: John R. Levine [mailto:johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com]
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 10:15 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] Interesting Dupe Signatures
I don't see much benefit for saving the header hash, since it depends
on
the order that the headers are listed in the h= header.
Right, but if the "h=" and the "c=" for the header are the same, you can reuse
them.
On the other hand, doing both the simple and relaxed body hashes in a
pass
over the body would handle about 99.999% of the signatures that anyone
cares about. I haven't seen many l= signatures, other than from Cisco,
and I don't think I've seen any where the l= didn't cover the whole
message.
That might also be a good optimization, especially if we can assume that SHA is
cheap.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html