Good? Probably not, useful, not really but that is a policy thingee. Thanks,
Bill Oxley Messaging Engineer Cox Communications, Inc. Alpharetta GA 404-847-6397 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Hansen Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue: which headers should we REQUIRE to be signed? With h=;, you don't need to sign the header. And with l=0, you don't need the body either. But I'm not convinced that either one would be a good thing to do. Tony Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > With no headers at all being signed, a signature should still be either > valid or invalid and therefore still useful. Don't NEED headers for > base. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
