In <20040214013111(_dot_)GA23747(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu>
mw-list-spf-discuss(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu writes:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 05:57:59PM -0800, James Couzens wrote:
SHA is bound to be larger? (6 bytes per hash?) Is there sufficient
reason to not go with base64 encoded MD5 hash?
As it has been pointed out before a few times: you cannot use base 64
in email addresses.
Well, I agree that using base64 is not a good idea, but others
disagree. In particular, Meng says:
: screw it, we're going to assume case sensitivity, and use base64. if
: it gets mangled, we drop it. if it turns out that wasn't such a good
: idea we can always put out a new version of the rfc before we get to
: draft standard status.
The only mailer that I know of that uppercased email addresses was my
ex-wifes and that was a few years ago. I no longer emailer her, so I
don't know if this is still the case.
If you actually have examples of where base64 will bit us, you might
want to give specific examples now.
-wayne