On 25/Apr/10 08:04, [email protected] wrote: >>> field, DKIM is doing something "wrong". In any case, it was suggested on >>> that list that "relaxed" header canonicalization be adjusted to accommodate >>> this.
I'd rather define new canonicalization algorithms than tamper with existing ones. >> [...] but the addresses in To:, From:, Cc;, and so forth certainly are > [...] But since new media types are defined all the time, and old ones are > revised, to say nothing of the types people just make up and never register. > As such, you cannot possibly code something that gets case normalization > right in general. So yes, it's hopeless. An alternative would be to err on the other side: a "mellowed" canonicalization, that respects only the fields and entities whose meaning and encoding is well known and stable, so as to allow some kind of forgeries rather than accidental breaking. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
