> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Mark Martinec > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 10:09 AM > To: IETF DKIM WG > Subject: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis-03: issues with 'z= > Copied header fields' > > [...] > It would be beneficial if the rfc would at least recommend one order. > It may seem obvious that a top-down order comes naturally, but > considering that a signing algorithm walks through multiple occurrences > of header fields bottom-up, the top-down order may no longer appear > so natural.
[as participant, not co-editor] I tend to agree, since this way one could definitively detect header field re-ordering. Even though, via the "h=" semantics, DKIM is fairly resilient to re-ordering, it might be helpful during diagnostic work to be able to detect for certain that it has occurred. > [...] > In short, I think the paragraph should just be removed. Agree here too. -MSK _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
