Specifically because of the "word in the street" that's been going out
at things like the Email Authentication Summits and MAAWG, our plans
currently are to do verifications of both allman-01 and dkim-official.
The differences are minor enough to support both easily. (My prototype
code currently does verifications of *all* versions, but that's not what
will be deployed to our customers.)
Tony
Michael Thomas wrote:
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.
_______________________________________________
dkim-dev mailing list
dkim-dev(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-dev