On 16May11, Alessandro Vesely allegedly wrote: > On 16/May/11 15:41, John R. Levine wrote: > >> http://www.opendkim.org/stats/report.html#hdr_canon says > >> > >> Header canonicalization use: > >> canonicalization count domains passed > >> simple 653688 6786 591938 > >> relaxed 3940377 56621 3640854 > >> > >> Although they only differ by 2% (90% simple vs 92% relaxed), such > >> percentages would be superb for tools like Spamassassin. I'd expect > >> at least 99% from a cryptographic tool. > > > > This tells me that the benefit from relaxed is at most pretty small. > > OTOH, comparing the "count" fields of those two lines, 86% relaxed vs > 14% simple, says that such kind of benefit is really really wanted.
But that's a perceived benefit, not an actual one. Folk think they need "relaxed" to significantly increase survivability but that's not the case given the stats above. So yo may be right that folk really really want it, but they don't really really need it. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
