-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Alessandro
Vesely
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 9:29 AM
To: ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New canonicalizations
On 27/May/11 19:16, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I'm all for including experimental code in future releases of our
stuff, especially if it's an experiment other implementations are
trying. But I need to see a spec first, or enough detail that I
could write one.
For the body, I brought some ideas[1]. For MIME header fields,
punctuation and boundaries need to be omitted as well. For other
header fields, including the DKIM-Signature, it is probably enough to
remove just any white space.
[1] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2011q2/016692.html
IMHO, the "hard parts" of the code are (i) selecting a MIME parser,
and (ii) finding a good way to structure experimental C14Ns and handle
double (triple?) signatures in the existing code.
One of the elegant things about the current canonicalizations is that they can
stream. I think a system that's MIME-aware can too, but possibly not, and in
any case having to teach a DKIM implementation about MIME will make it a lot
more complicated and expensive. If we have to go down that road, I think
working on DOSETA and MIMEAUTH is the way to go.
If we want the lower-hanging fruits, we might take the list of things MLMs like
to do to messages and find ways to canonicalize those. Fortunately, we made a
list of the common ones in the MLM document.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html