On 16/May/11 19:00, Michael Thomas wrote: > On 05/16/2011 09:39 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote: >> The problem with the above is the biasing factor of signers' choosing to use >> one >> or the other, based on criteria we can't know about. Their criteria might >> have >> greatly affected actual survival rates. Or might not have... > > My guess is that admins just don't understand any of the subtleties, > have heard lore that "relaxed" is "better" and just click "relaxed" > wherever they find it. It may also be the case that some implementations > don't even have separate nerd knobs for headers and body canonicalization.
However, Murray's stats show some difference in the choice of relaxed: Header canonicalization use: canonicalization count domains passed simple 653688 6786 591938 relaxed 3940377 56621 3640854 Body canonicalization use: canonicalization count domains passed simple 1187858 11526 1096204 relaxed 3406207 51818 3136588 For the body count, we have 74% relaxed vs 26% simple, while it is 86% relaxed vs 14% simple for the header. There is a 12% difference toward relaxing the header, which implies some thought or testing. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
