|
Re: dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim: msg#00519ietf.dkim
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eliot Lear" <lear@xxxxxxxxx> To: "Hector Santos" <hsantos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Hector, >> For humans, computers or both? >> > > I was thinking computers, but really this is small potatos. For one, > you have to do the signature verification and this is going to be the > CPU intensive component of the operation. And as we've heard from > implementors, most people are disk or network bound anyway. I asked because flexibility, including human readability, even at the expense of extra bytes seems to be a popular desire. I'm going thru this issue right now for a proposal I'm writing. A few offlist reviewers preferred an expanded human literal form which, although very readable, it also tripled its size. :-) --- Hector |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim: 00519, Douglas Otis |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Trust Annotation Support: 00519, J.D. Falk |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkimi: 00519, Eliot Lear |
| Next by Thread: | Re: dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim: 00519, Douglas Otis |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |