On 5/25/2011 9:59 AM, John Levine wrote: >> The idea is to anticipate any unknown signature breaker. > > I'm pretty sure that's specifically out of scope. > > And I promise that whatever you do, short of wrapping the whole > message in opaque armor, I can come up with something that will > break it.
One might have a goal of attempting to be robust against all forms of potential breakage. That's not likely to be the goal of this sort of exercise. Rather, it will be to choose a set of particular types of breakage, ignoring others. For an effort like that, it is not meaningful to come up with additional types of breakage, since there is no attempt to cover such additional examples. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
