>Exactly. If you're using something other than SMTP DATA, such as SMTP >BDAT, it is conceivable that the body could wind up without an ending >CRLF....
BDAT is part of the CHUNKING extension defined in experimental RFC 1830 in 1995. It's been 11 years. Does anyone use it? Has anyone even proposed making it standards track? I don't ever recall running into it, so I don't see any point in worrying about it. We may well end up using the DKIM key infrastructure for signatures of other things, but it's going to take a lot more than deciding which line endings to ignore to make that happen. R's, John PS: If anyone ever updates that RFC, it's now called Chongqing. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
