On July 26, 2005 at 06:27, domainkeys-feedbackbase02(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com wrote:
Ahhh. So we're talking about heavy-weight key fetching alternatives. I though
the original discussion was about *optional* accreditation look-ups that were
additional to verification.
I for one would not vote for a mechanism that could potentially result in my
inbound systems having to initiate a large number of heavy-weight key look-up
requests. And, if the sender can choose to send with q=xkms, that inbound
system load is quite a feasible scenario, in my mind.
I do NOT believe that anyone is stating that something like xkms or
joebob PKI method must be supported to be DKIM compliant. It can
be specified that to be DKIM compliant, only the DNS method must be
supported. Alternative methods are considered extensions and only
need to be supported if a DKIM adopter/implementor chooses to do so.