[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Where is the formal definition of DKIM-Signature?

2018-02-08 11:28:34
The ones I wrote certainly didn't require v=1 to come first. ;-)

But you're right: there's probably cause to be concerned.


On 2/8/18, 10:08 AM, "ietf-dkim on behalf of John R. Levine" 
<ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org on behalf of 
johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com> wrote:

    > "v=1" doesn't have to come first.  It just usually does.  I think there 
    > a version of RFC4871 that did that, but then when challenged we couldn't
    > come up with a good reason to keep it that way.
    I wonder how many DKIM libraries will accept a signature where it doesn't.  

NOTE WELL: This list operates according to