ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] New canonicalizations

2011-05-16 12:00:32
On 05/16/2011 07:40 AM, Mark Delany wrote:
On 16May11, Alessandro Vesely allegedly wrote:
OTOH, comparing the "count" fields of those two lines, 86% relaxed vs
14% simple, says that such kind of benefit is really really wanted.
     
But that's a perceived benefit, not an actual one.

Folk think they need "relaxed" to significantly increase survivability
but that's not the case given the stats above. So yo may be right that
folk really really want it, but they don't really really need it.
   

It was our experience that relaxed body didn't make much
difference. Relaxed headers was a different story.

I don't have access to all of the ways signatures broke any
more, but if you factor out "real" mailing lists it was pretty
low and sort of random, iirc.

Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html