[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker
I don't think I understand what it means for a signer to be
required to support two different "SHOULD" requirements for
the same function.
Perhaps there is a distinction between saying that the
signing implementation MUST *support* a core set of
algorithms, versus that a signer SHOULD *use* one of them?
We could go with signers SHOULD support at least one of SHA-1 and
It could be argued this needs to be a MUST but I am nervous about
mandating support for an alg we know is likely to be deprecated before
the spec is reved.
For interop we need to make verifier support a MUST.
I would like to know more about the precise patent encumberances of ECC.
I can well imagine that when the time comes to upgrade alg requirements
we mandate ECC support. DKIM is a classic application for ECC.
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to