On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:30:50AM -0700, Michael Thomas allegedly wrote: > Tony Hansen wrote: > > >This not a problem when using DATA. Check 2821 section 4.1.1.4; the > >ending crlf.crlf was clarified as being the trailing crlf of the last > >line of the message followed by the terminator sequence. > > > > Note that the first <CRLF> of this terminating sequence is also the > > <CRLF> that ends the final line of the data (message text) or, if > > there was no data, ends the DATA command itself. > > > >You are correct that the problem exists when using BDAT. > > > >My implementation uses the last CRLF in if it's there. If there is no > >last CRLF, it does *not* add one. > > > > > > > Having just worked through this myself, I'll say that Tony's interpretation > *has* to be the correct one otherwise an l= less than the body length won't > be correct. Namely: > > "a b</body></html>" where l=3 is: "a b" not "a b<crlf>" or any other > weird interpretation. This is definitely worth a mention in the draft.
That would only be true if the signer forgets to add CRLF prior to feeding into the signing code. In that case you would get an l=5, not an l=3. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
