It appears that Bron Gondwana <[email protected]> said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >You haven't said anything new here. The key point of disagreement is that you >come down on the JSON is too complex side of a tradeoff: > >A) encoding the entire allowable space of email addresses in a key-value >format would require escapes in any key-value format. >B) JSON is more complex, but already has clearly defined escapes, and >base64+json allows us structure without having to invent a new format. > >The authors of the existing DKIM2 spec believe that the benefits of a >pre-existing structure in JSON outweight the risks. You disagree. At some >point we may need a >consensus call from the chairs on this technical choice if we can't get an >agreement.
I haven't seen any other pushback about base64 JSON, notably not from people doing implementations. Encoding or decoding it is two nested library calls and honestly, if we have malware in our base64 or JSON libraries, we have way worse problems than DKIM2. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
