-----Original Message-----
From: mail-vet-discuss-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:mail-vet-discuss-
bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 1:56 PM
To: mail-vet-discuss(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [mail-vet-discuss] Proposed "header.b" tag for DKIM
signatures
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:01:46AM -0700, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I propose that we need a new tag, "header.b", which will contain the
first several characters of the actual digital signature, which is
pretty
much guaranteed to be unique among signatures present. This will
allow
unambiguous matching of signatures with results.
I sense some conflict between "pretty much guaranteed" and
"unambiguous".
How many signature bytes are you proposing to use?
The spec says a minimum of eight, but enough to be able to be unambiguous. A
few security types around the IETF I've polled about this seem to think that's
adequate.
Do you have another suggestion?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html