On 3/17/25 8:10 AM, Allen Robinson wrote:
re: numbering (to keep this all in one email)
We absolutely need ordering. Maybe we don't need an index number to
have guarantees about that ordering surviving transit, which is
potentially reasonable since we have the same requirement for any
signed repeated headers. Upgrading all of those ordering SHOULDs into
MUSTs may be a good idea.
Absent any evidence to the contrary, why should I or anybody else
believe that this is an actual problem in the field? I don't remember
why it's a SHOULD vs a MUST re: trace headers, but an update to DKIM
could change it to a MUST if need be.
Is the index number hsrmful is some way that I'm not seeing?
The point is why do something that isn't needed? But there is harm in
that i= is already a valid DKIM tag and since it's not been decided
whether it's a new protocol or an update it shouldn't make breaking
changes gratuitously.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
