[hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Atom 'Smasher' <atom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:12:03 -0500 (EST)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Simon Josefsson wrote:
hi simon!! i didn't know you where on this list...
PPS. How about renaming X-Hashcash: to Hashcash:? The 'X-' prefix
also look ugly, and was only discussed in RFC 822, not in the current
RFC 2822.
I thought all unofficial headers are supposed to be prefixed by 'X-'.
Only according to RFC 822, but not according to RFC 2822.
================
in any case, if the header is recognized as "official", then there's no
need to prefix it with "X-". simon and i are working on having another
header officially recognized - http://josefsson.org/openpgp-header/
- --
...atom
_________________________________________
PGP key - http://atom.smasher.org/pgp.txt
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------
"The people I put in jail have more honor than the top
administration in this organization."
-- Bob Hoffman, B.A.T.F. agent,
"60 Minutes", January 1993
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.93 (FreeBSD)
Comment: What is this gibberish?
Comment: http://atom.smasher.org/links/#digital_signatures
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJBwVFtAAoJEAx/d+cTpVcihK0IAID4trU98ENDZgHcUt2gXx4H
SnKMZyMQynTmYdKO727Z6LqmS2mceizSYqGdVGJjTvfqqSYZCnxSmjxkEyS2xiMP
8Se+DYCdRsoqsV0R4GUSVlb6iSGqeaDU1OOnd6Z2486XVl7WYA500ooY2LD1FQui
HpY+YvxSiPPHUg2tjIDgDIqEBR9Gw3bJvycB1PYmqFzLMAH+bY6kZscjfuvJEibc
6UwA4OyMDDGFi0ndqtsxl0V+RLlQIP+rjv58SW/6T8e4v1NtgZkXvsjcbbv8CdTk
xU0tU5S9y0MJphjO/xyEnQ2O7ozlcghsL+fi+yYdv9Cy9FBcGRb1jam1wT74Cww=
=GxCk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Follow-Ups:
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Adam Back
- References:
- [hashcash] Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Simon Josefsson
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Justin
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Simon Josefsson
Other related posts:
- » [hashcash] Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- » [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
PPS. How about renaming X-Hashcash: to Hashcash:? The 'X-' prefix also look ugly, and was only discussed in RFC 822, not in the current RFC 2822.
I thought all unofficial headers are supposed to be prefixed by 'X-'.
Only according to RFC 822, but not according to RFC 2822.
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Adam Back
- [hashcash] Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Simon Josefsson
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Justin
- [hashcash] Re: Length of recent X-Hashcash cookies?
- From: Simon Josefsson