Ned Freed wrote:
As for the liklihood that people will deploy DKIM in simple mode, only
to find
that it fails, this can be dealt with by appropriate wording choices. The
current wording is IMO inadequate - this needs to be a SHOULD use nowsp mode
unless you're sure simple mode will work. noswp mode also need to be the
default.
Ned,
I agree with a lot of what you say in this post, but I think
you're missing one use case of simple which doesn't have an
dependencies on aspirations: the case were a signer would rather
the signature break -- with even the possibility of discard.
For example, statements(_at_)bigbank(_dot_)com probably does not want anything
monkeyed with their statement, and is willing to tolerate the
risk of manglers. Whether this leads us toward Mark's aspiration
goal I don't know, but I do expect that this sort of hard line
to be common within sections of the deployed base.
Mike