On 03/Nov/10 14:54, John R. Levine wrote: > At this point, it would be helpful if you could propose specific language > for 4871bis. And if it's not presuming 5322 compliance, it would also be > helpful if you could say in detail what a DKIM signer and verifier should > do if presented with, say, a Windows executable file. Not a MIME encoded > message body containing one, just an EXE file. If you don't require 5322 > compliance or something close to it, that's as legitimate a signing > candidate as anything.
Uh, ok, you're right. I guess I should have stopped arguing since this thread became a dialogue among deaf people --I would have done so if I had seen any other sign of progress on this subject. BTW, I haven't yet tried to submit that EXE file to the DKIM software I use. I will. I hope we all agree that the spec's better not contain phrases such as "an implementation SHOULD crash..." :-/ _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
