John R. Levine wrote: >> By introducing a loose canonicalization we may learn whether signature >> survivability affects DKIM adoption. > > Feel free to do some experiments. One of the reasons that DKIM has had > relatively few implementation surprises is that we already knew how DK > worked.
Overall, I would like to agree, but then again, there are still problems, including in how DK worked and we still coming up with surprises. The issues we come across and how we deal with it, is par for the course for how most things are considered important or not - Who it happens to (the messenger), is a very important factor in all this. -- 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
