ietf-mailsig
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational

2005-07-17 17:11:21


 > We already have four of those; we don't need a fifth.
 Do you want to advocate one of these mechanisms in conjunction with
 DKIM?
 No, I want to leave them to do what they are good and and not try to have
 DKIM
 solve every problem with message integrity out there.


Ned and Mark,

I am not understanding what specific, technical change to the current spec is
being suggested.

Repeating what I've said in previous messages:

(1) Simple mode canonicalization needs to ignore header folding. It also
    probably should ignore header field name capitalization.
(2) Language needs to be added to the effect that noswp mode SHOULD be used
    unless you know for sure that simple mode will work in your situation.

I also don't think interior white space removal is necessary in noswp mode, but
I can live with it being done.

                                Ned


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>