Subject: [Ietf-dkim] Re: Review of draft-gondwana-dkim2-modification-alegbra-01
From: Wei Chuang <[email-masked]>
To: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 17:11:07 -0700
List-Id: IETF DKIM List <ietf-dkim.ietf.org>

On Sat, Apr 5, 2025 at 10:58 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]> wrote:

>
> IMHO, the original Bron's idea of a single DKIM2-Delta-Header: per
> signature is more practical.  Otherwise, it'd be nicer to have:
>
> DKIM2-Original-From: i=3; YnJvbmdAZmFzdG1haWx0ZWFtLmNvbQo="
> From: [email-masked]
> DKIM2-Original-Reply-To: i=3;
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> DKIM2-Original-Subject: i=3; A replacement for DKIM
> Subject: [DKIM2] A replacement for DKIM
>
> Empty fields are equivalent to non-existing.
>

FWIW if we go with per header mutations, I find this style of inlining the
original header name as a suffix is more readable.

-Wei