ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] New canonicalizations

2011-05-24 19:35:45


On 5/23/2011 10:26 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
If one were to encode somehow an extension indication that "this content was
subjected to 8-to-7 downgrade" as a hint that a verifier should do the
reverse before verifying, the verifier would have to manage to undo the
downgrade in precisely, i.e. byte-for-byte, the same manner that the
downgrade was done for it to work.  That's a pretty high requirement for
interoperability (i.e., it's pretty error-prone), so it requires a
specification and it would need to be consistent with the MIME RFCs.

So assuming it's a useful endeavour, it seems to me there's a lot of work to
be done here.

Let's make it be the right work.

To make a canonicalization algorithm that is more robust -- such as having it 
based on canonical forms of data, independent of encoding -- makes some sense. 
Trying to create the ability to "reverse" changes strikes me as far to complex 
and fragile to be reasonable.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html