[ietf-dkim] ISSUE: tag l=2 and dealing with leading blank lines for SIMPLE c14n.

[Scott Kitterman]

On Wednesday 24 January 2007 01:34, Jim Fenton wrote:

> If the signer wants to make sure that messages are not subject to
> "append attacks", they shouldn't use l=.  Use the default.
>
IIRC, every time someone brings up l= problems, the response is don't use it.  
Is there a problem it solves that we need it?  If it's inherently risky and 
should not be used, I'm wondering if it should even be in the RFC?

Scott K