[ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary
barryleiba at computer.org
Fri May 29 06:36:44 PDT 2009
> DKIM is too complicated as it is, and it strikes me as an extremely poor
> idea to add yet more cruft to work around perverse situations that are as
> yet (and probably always) entirely hypothetical.
I don't understand what "cruft" you think I'm talking about. Nothing
in my message needs anything added to DKIM, and no one is suggesting
removing anything from DKIM that will invalidate what my message said.
More information about the ietf-dkim