Paul Hoffman wrote: > At 6:57 AM -0800 3/28/06, Michael Thomas wrote: >> So I'll ask: is there anybody out there who thinks that the current >> set of mechanisms in -allman-01 is insufficient and/or wrong for dealing >> with this problem? > > Yes (insufficient). The current proposal for allowing signers to only > have to compute the hash once for large message bodies that will be > sent out numerous times (such as in a mailing list) seems like an > improvement. IMO (In My Observations), most mailing lists don't need this feature because they send the same message, body and headers, to all recipients so the signature is the same even under the allman-01 mechanism. I get a few messages with customized To: addresses, but most of them have customized body content as well.
Paul, do any of the mailing lists you administer send the same body with different headers to different subscribers? Don't interpret this as an argument against the new hashing proposal. I just want the decision to be based on correct information. -Jim _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
