RFC 4871, "DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", May 2007
Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 6376Source of RFC: dkim (sec)
Errata ID: 1942
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Murray S. Kucherawy
Date Reported: 2009-11-11
Rejected by: Pasi Eronen
Date Rejected: 2010-03-01
Section 3.4.4 says:
The "relaxed" body canonicalization algorithm:
It should say:
The "relaxed" body canonicalization algorithm MUST apply the following steps in order:
The order of the steps should be enforced, as in section 3.4.2. I have two disagreeing interpretations that have resulted in an interoperability problem (fortunately a corner case), namely:
<CRLF><CRLF><SP><SP><CRLF> should be canonicalized as what? Taken top-to-bottom, the output is the empty body; given the other pending errata, the output should be a single <CRLF>; yet another interpretation strips trailing <CRLF>s first, then does space trimming, leaving the output as <CRLF><CRLF><CRLF>.
I might further suggest changing these steps to an enumerated/ordered list instead of a list of bullet points.
Duplicate; this issue is already covered by errata 1384.