Re: [ietf-dkim] That weird i= is most probably EDSP

2013-08-04 Thread John Levine
My problem is that absent a draft, you're lobbing a vague proposal over the wall and hoping the community will do all of the work for you. That was my sense, too. Writing a draft and submitting it is not a huge effort (at least, not if you know what you're going to say), and it has the advantage

Re: [ietf-dkim] Seeking Clarification of the l= Tag

2013-08-04 Thread Hector Santos
On 8/4/2013 4:35 PM, Pawel Lesnikowski wrote: There are few details I'd like to clarify. Body hash for this message is correctly computed by the sender. Entire signature of this message in fact valid - this is why Port25, Gmail, and Mail.dll validate DKIM signature with 'pass' result. The

Re: [ietf-dkim] Seeking Clarification of the l= Tag

2013-08-04 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Pawel Lesnikowski lesnikow...@limilabs.comwrote: There are few details I'd like to clarify. Body hash for this message is correctly computed by the sender. Entire signature of this message in fact valid - this is why Port25, Gmail, and Mail.dll validate DKIM