ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

[ietf-dkim] Bug in our "l=" extension stats

2011-05-10 14:18:18
I think OpenDKIM's stats stuff has a discrepancy in how we've been reporting 
"l=".  The use counts are right, but the stats about "received size was greater 
than l= size" is wrong at least for the cases where "relaxed" body 
canonicalization is in use and the value of "l=" was not zero.

The quantities recorded are:

-          Total body length

-          Canonicalized bytes

-          Value of "l="

Where "simple" is in use, comparing these values can tell you whether or not 
the message was extended.  Where "relaxed" is in use, you have to account for 
the fact that the second value might be smaller than the first even for a 
message that had nothing appended to it (for bytes that were dropped), and we 
haven't been doing that.

I'm working to correct this for the next version which will be out soonish.  
I'll re-run the report selecting for "simple" only in the near future to get a 
more accurate picture.  I don't expect the message will be largely different, 
but I do prefer to be accurate.

-MSK

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>