> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 9:29 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New canonicalizations > > On 27/May/11 19:16, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > I'm all for including experimental code in future releases of our > > stuff, especially if it's an experiment other implementations are > > trying. But I need to see a spec first, or enough detail that I > > could write one. > > For the body, I brought some ideas[1]. For MIME header fields, > punctuation and boundaries need to be omitted as well. For other > header fields, including the DKIM-Signature, it is probably enough to > remove just any white space. > [1] http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2011q2/016692.html > > IMHO, the "hard parts" of the code are (i) selecting a MIME parser, > and (ii) finding a good way to structure experimental C14Ns and handle > double (triple?) signatures in the existing code.
One of the elegant things about the current canonicalizations is that they can stream. I think a system that's MIME-aware can too, but possibly not, and in any case having to teach a DKIM implementation about MIME will make it a lot more complicated and expensive. If we have to go down that road, I think working on DOSETA and MIMEAUTH is the way to go. If we want the lower-hanging fruits, we might take the list of things MLMs like to do to messages and find ways to canonicalize those. Fortunately, we made a list of the common ones in the MLM document. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
