On Friday, May 20, 2011 01:18:39 AM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 7:20 PM
> > To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
> > Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy
> > Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] 8bit downgrades
> >
> > I thi
>> of what paths are likely to downcode a message and what paths aren't,
>> so I would prefer not to purport to offer advice about it.
>
>Actually, I kinda prefer to leave it in. It seems to me "assume a
>downgrade will happen unless you're certain it won't, and plan
>accordingly" is good advice w
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> Such conversion is outside the scope of DKIM; the actual
>> message SHOULD be converted to 7-bit MIME by an MUA or MSA
>> prior to presentation to the DKIM
>
> I read that (in the context of the paragraph containing it, of course)
> to mean the particula
On May 19, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
> In RFC 2119 (the document that defines MUST, SHOULD, etc.), "MUST" does not
> mean "vitally important" and "SHOULD" does not mean "really really important,
> but less important than MUST". "MUST" means "you have to do this or you're
> not going
Borrowing the style in RFC1123 (Internet Mail Hosting Requirements) I
did a regular expression grep for
{MUST}|{SHOULD}|{MAY}|{RECOMMENDED}|{OPTIONAL}|{REQUIRED}|{SHALL}
to begin to look at all the RFC2119 semantics.
At first, I was going to pull out some old prolog AI code that makes
asso
On 5/19/2011 7:34 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Since dev
> managers literally looks at MUST's and SHOULD and ignore
> MAY's to determine what gets implemented, this is not
> quite as academic.
That's a rather significant assessment. It means that all of the Internet
specifications done for th
