On 16/May/11 19:00, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 05/16/2011 09:39 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
The problem with the above is the biasing factor of signers' choosing to use
one
or the other, based on criteria we can't know about. Their criteria might
have
greatly affected actual survival rates. Or might not have...
My guess is that admins just don't understand any of the subtleties,
have heard lore that "relaxed" is "better" and just click "relaxed"
wherever they find it. It may also be the case that some implementations
don't even have separate nerd knobs for headers and body canonicalization.
However, Murray's stats show some difference in the choice of relaxed:
Header canonicalization use:
canonicalization count domains passed
simple 653688 6786 591938
relaxed 3940377 56621 3640854
Body canonicalization use:
canonicalization count domains passed
simple 1187858 11526 1096204
relaxed 3406207 51818 3136588
For the body count, we have 74% relaxed vs 26% simple, while it is 86%
relaxed vs 14% simple for the header. There is a 12% difference
toward relaxing the header, which implies some thought or testing.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html