[ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalized null body and dkim

[Eric Allman]

I've changed the text to read "If there is no body or no trailing 
CRLF on the message body, a CRLF is added" in order to avoid any 
confusion.

eric


--On January 10, 2007 6:30:05 AM +0100 Frank Ellermann 
<nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote:

> Hector Santos wrote:
>
>> I'm not grasping the problem.
>
> Apparently the canonicalization of "no body" (no CRLF CRLF) is
> different from "empty body" (only CRLF CRLF).  It's odd enough
> to mention it in the spec. (maybe as note or example).
>
>> I think the issue is being overblown.
>
> If your implementation treats "no body" like "empty body" and
> other implementations don't we've to agree on one way to get
> this right.  Or rather Eric has to describe it unambiguously.
>
> Frank
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
>