[Mimedefang] Reputation Reporting Protocol submitted to IETF as an I-D
Andrzej Adam Filip
anfi at onet.eu
Sat Jun 19 15:06:47 EDT 2010
"David F. Skoll" <dfs at roaringpenguin.com> wrote:
> Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
>> IMHO you should "generalize" support for different signature types
>> e.g. 1 extra byte for signature length and 1 extra byte for signature type
> I'm not sure what you mean by "signature types". Could you explain?
> Are you referring to the truncated HMAC?
Yes. IMHO you should create protocol capable to support other
"sender signature" types even if for long time only one
type is going to be supported.
[pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : anfi at onet.eu
Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet.
-- P. E. Trudeau
More information about the MIMEDefang