dkim-dev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [dkim-dev] Updated implementations

2006-06-20 12:12:26
Mircea Purdea wrote:



Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

To those of you with implementations modified to support base-01 and base-02 (mainly the "bh" tag), did you leave in backward compatibility for verifying signatures generated with base-00?

A customer is wondering what impact it'll have if they use the newer code.


My implementation no longer supports the old spec. Like someone on the -ietf list said, it's bad practice to prolong the use of expired drafts.
You know, progress, and all that...

In this particular case, we have been telling people that -allman-01 was a stable draft and to implement that, which I think given how things have panned out is still good advice. If we get through last call in the next month or so as we're hoping, we might change our tune, but as I said there isn't much difficulty in supporting both
in the verifier.

      Mike
_______________________________________________
dkim-dev mailing list
dkim-dev(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-dev

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>