It appears that Jon Callas <[email protected]> said: >And look at it -- l= is intended to increase robustness and strictness of >interpreting the message.
I don't see how that followes. In all the years I've been futzing with email I can't ever think of a time where a message showed up with added crud at the end and the right thing to do was to discard the crud and keep going. (I'm ignoring the old sendmail bug that added blank lines.) Maybe you can tell it's from a list and the crud is benign, or maybe you can't and you should treat it as suspicious. The rationale I recall for l= is that it would let mailing lists put a footer on messages. That never seemed very persuasive, both because lists make a lot of other changes to messages, and because it opens up a hole you can drive an ocean liner throught. I also recall people claiming with a straight face that MUAs would show the signed and unsigned parts of a message in different colors so the user could decide which parts of it to believe. I hope I don't have to explain why that was a terrible idea. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
