Re: [Asrg] Body signature subgroup and the forwarding project

[Bruce Lilly <blilly at erols.com>]

>  Date: 2005-08-05 04:00
>  From: Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net>

> We have seen some evidence that people believe the names that are used to label 
> an activity. 
> 
> I believe this potentially useful activity is NOT about signatures.
> 
> It is about "survivable" canonicalization.  Since that is such an awkward 
> phrase, it is probably reasonable to say it is about  hashes.

Well, it's about canonicalization for the purpose of having something over
which to compute a hash, for the purpose of signing selected parts of a
message (including some header fields and possibly only an initial portion
of the message body).
 
> calling the activity bodysig is going to draw folk that actually want to talk 
> about signatures.

Calling it "Body signature subgroup" is downright misleading, since it
involves header fields and possibly only a part of the body (we already
have Content-MD5 (RFC 1864, a Draft Standard) for body and MIME body part
hashes). 

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg