The Security Considerations will still need to explain why they are
light enough that we aren't going straight to sha 256.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
On 9/24/2010 2:53 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
But perhaps the easiest way to solve this debate was pointed out by Barry:
The IESG would be unlikely to support a protocol with even light security
implications that uses MD5 without a lot of research into why it's the best
choice over other algorithms. So that's that. :)
_______________________________________________
dkim-ops mailing list
dkim-ops(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dkim-ops