Paul Hoffman wrote: > At 9:20 AM -0700 4/25/06, Douglas Otis wrote: >> ,--- >> |3.4.5 Body Length Limits >> |... >> | Note that verifiers MAY choose to reject or truncate messages that >> | have body content beyond that specified by the body length count. >> '___ >> >> change to: >> >> : Note that verifiers MAY choose to truncate messages that have body >> : content beyond that specified by the body length count. >> >> While use of l= should be depreciated, it seems disruptive to have >> this mechanism possibly induce the rejection of messages. The >> general goal should have all DKIM compliant MTA make the same basic >> choice of whether a mechanism is acceptable or not. > > Agree. This is the only place where rejecting the message based on > verification faults is mentioned. Also agree with the part about not mentioning rejection of messages.
-Jim _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
