John Levine wrote: >> Can anyone remember why there's a SHOULD for the downgrade to 7-bit in >> RFC4871 Section 5.3, rather than a MUST? The likelihood of breakage is >> so high when sending 8-bit data that DKIM almost becomes pointless >> without the upgrade. > > I think Pete's analysis is correct, but my advice would be to take > it out altogether.
I don't believe Pete's analysis is correct, but I concur that first paragraph should be taken out. This is a Gateway, Border issue and SMTP has plenty to see already about it. > We don't have any great insight into the warts > of what paths are likely to downcode a message and what paths aren't, > so I would prefer not to purport to offer advice about it. We do have great insight - Don't Tamper with Passthru mail - that should be the advice burn into systems if we want a future DKIM life to be without stress. -- Hector Santos, CTO http://www.santronics.com http://santronics.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
