On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 4:26 PM Franck Martin <fmar...@linkedin.com> wrote:

> A last nit, many standardized on opendkim, because of interoperability.
> There were too many weird things happening between different
> implementations of DKIM1. I don’t know if interoperability should be better
> addressed (better debugging, reporting), or the suggestion that everyone
> should use the same library.
>

Do you have any examples of such problems?  I thought the interoperability
testing we did with DKIM was some of the most thorough I've seen in the
IETF (at least in the applications areas) since I started, so I'm surprised
that stuff got through.  The only thing I've heard of is [in]consistency
around how different implementations do [not] implement "x=".

In any event, I agree that we should strive to meet or surpass the
thoroughness of what we did for DKIM.  On whether the charter has to say
that expressly, I'm less certain.

-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to