Re: [ietf-dkim] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6376 (5260)

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Thu, 08 February 2018 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3182F1270A3 for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:11:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.789
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1536-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=iecc.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cn6Yrklc6SmY for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9C71120713 for <ietf-dkim-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:11:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w18KBBbg017348; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:11:12 -0800
Authentication-Results: simon.songbird.com; dkim=fail reason="verification failed; unprotected key" header.d=iecc.com header.i=@iecc.com header.b=N7+1bMFg; dkim-adsp=none (unprotected policy); dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [64.57.183.53]) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w18KB7CS017344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:11:09 -0800
Received: (qmail 48086 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2018 20:10:10 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=bbd4.5a7caea2.k1802; bh=iB2YzwaJaAjYHVCb5ifJhXQfHv7K3gjMFSdKfUQsnmU=; b=N7+1bMFg3FgEYRNlXHYsOGVgfvkNlfdvBYjJoqEgo1Rf5Ug27RRF1YdZnESOzaH83tRyfN8Q0oG/o3h583nJvBIGl3UnqGMPOmwl439osZ3dq2EFNa8OUM5JiN5W8NeTjf2Cs4mhW9PjPtb7HVgU/AvJsAjDMU4uE/SgLR8EK0jpTR5Lg7t8GyStB1CmrhWGS3TLJmR+voyWbw1G6GiFN022A+cENB8q2sKDPltge312CPINGhxvpEaB7tp6R7Ov
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 08 Feb 2018 20:10:10 -0000
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 15:10:09 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1802081509520.53281@ary.qy>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6376 (5260)
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DKIM Discussion List <ietf-dkim.mipassoc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/options/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Sender: ietf-dkim <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>

>  NEW
>
>    Header fields are lines beginning with a field name, followed by a
>    colon (":"), followed by a field body, and terminated by CRLF.  A
>    field name MUST be composed of printable US-ASCII characters (i.e.,
>    characters that have values between 33 and 126, inclusive), except
>    colon.  In all cases, field names are interpreted as case-insensitive
>    strings, so that, for example, "Subject", "SUBJECT", and "SuBjEcT"
>    are considered to be the same field name.

Seems reasonable.  While we're picking nits, RFC 3864 says you can't register a 
field with a dot in it, might be worth a mention.

Also, according to the spec, #)*%;' is a valid field name, although I observe 
that every name in the field name registries is LDH.  Would it be worth a note 
saying that LDH names are likely to interoperate better?

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html