The next version out will fix this, in less than a month. After we have a few months of data I might get a more accurate picture of relaxed body extension results, etc.
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 12:15 PM To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org Subject: [ietf-dkim] Bug in our "l=" extension stats I think OpenDKIM's stats stuff has a discrepancy in how we've been reporting "l=". The use counts are right, but the stats about "received size was greater than l= size" is wrong at least for the cases where "relaxed" body canonicalization is in use and the value of "l=" was not zero. The quantities recorded are: - Total body length - Canonicalized bytes - Value of "l=" Where "simple" is in use, comparing these values can tell you whether or not the message was extended. Where "relaxed" is in use, you have to account for the fact that the second value might be smaller than the first even for a message that had nothing appended to it (for bytes that were dropped), and we haven't been doing that. I'm working to correct this for the next version which will be out soonish. I'll re-run the report selecting for "simple" only in the near future to get a more accurate picture. I don't expect the message will be largely different, but I do prefer to be accurate. -MSK
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
