On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Kurt Andersen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The intent of section 5.2.1 was never to deal with pathological cases. It > was to deal with somewhat broken MTAs that do stupid things like reordering > headers in alphabetical order or slightly broken implementations which > might replicate headers. > > Reordering shouldn't be a problem for us because it's easy to search through a relatively short list for an ARC field bearing a particular "i=" value. If the only thing that ever happens is reordering, we should still be fine (a la DKIM's "h" tag). Duplication is arguably fine as long as the duplicate is identical to the original, but I think once you have to go so far as to evaluate that, the chain has actually been directly affected, and it's fine to give up. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
