On 10/8/2010 9:28 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I'm still cringing at the layering violation of "fixing" in DKIM the fact
that many RFC5322 implementations, MTAs, MSAs and MUAs alike, don't bother to
enforce normative portions of that specification.
Is there precedent of this being done elsewhere, i.e. compensating in one
protocol for abundant lousy implementations of a layer below it?
I'm a bit confused.
We want to re-submit DKIM Signing to Proposed Standard, in order to fix an edge
condition that is only a theoretical issue and only fixes a problem that is
actually outside of the scope of what DKIM is trying to achieve?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html