-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 6:04 PM
To: DKIM Mailing List
Subject: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: verifier message editing language
Per Murray's request, here's just the changes to take out the verifier
message editing
[...]
The stuff having to do with producing an alternate version of the text is
certainly wrong insofar as there's no extra visible copy produced, but I've
always interpreted that language as referring to the "internal" copy that gets
fed to the hash function. It certainly could be that I've just been around the
text and the algorithms long enough to believe that must be what the current
text means so I didn't think twice about it.
Anyway, I didn't omit this point intentionally last time. It's a reasonable
thing to clean up.
-MSK
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html