Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [arc-discuss] Canonicalization

From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:33:10 -0700

ARC-Discuss to BCC, moving the conversation to DMARC-WG

On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Raymond van Venetie via arc-discuss <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The ARC-Seal header does not include the canonicalization tag 'c' in the
> current specification. The ARC-Message-Signature includes the tag, but
> discards its value and uses relaxed/relaxed -- right?
> Shouldn't ARC-Seal also include the tag and simply ignore the value? Would
> be handy to have this tag in case a new (better) canonicalization algorithm
> is released.
>

 As per some earlier conversations, the latest draft
(draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-00) adds back in the "c=" tag for AMS (to
match DKIM usage), but since the ARC-Seal is only signing across headers
fields, it does not use or support any usage other than relaxed/relaxed.

--Kurt