Douglas Otis wrote:
OID information would not be needed with DKIM public key information.
Consider the DKIM public key cert isomorphic to that of OpenPGP.
IMO it is not in scope to develop an alternative to an X.509 PKI nor
anything else remotely equivalent. I believe that that or anything
remotely equivalent would require a recharter. Proposing to define
a new, supposedly simple, certificate format qualifies as remotely
equivalent. DKIM's just-a-key-in-DNS approach is about as complex as
I want to see this getting for a good while yet, if not forever.
So, regardless of whether or not we use TXT or some binary format,
we will not go down the road of developing yet another PKI.
If that's not what you meant, sorry for jumping up and down but you
can put my sensitivity down to the fact that I was involved in the
start of PKIX, now more than a *decade* ago;-)
Stephen.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html