ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?

2006-02-01 13:50:01


Dave Crocker wrote:
or the response. So just implementing
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/specs/draft-allman-dkim-base-00-10dc.txt
without SSP is considered a valid DKIM implementation?
>
 > Thanks for the response. So just implementing
 > http://mipassoc.org/dkim/specs/draft-allman-dkim-base-00-10dc.txt
 > without SSP is considered a valid DKIM implementation?

As I recall, people have had some debate about this exact point.

I believe, quite strongly, that implementing the core signature mechanism definitely qualifies as implementing DKIM.

While I don't disagree with Dave, I guess I ought to point out
the obvious, just for the record. Hopefully, there's no debate
needed.

Implementing an Internet-Draft is not implementing a standard.
For the latter, the RFC has to exist.

If you choose to write code based on an Internet-Draft you are
taking a risk that the specification changes before it becomes
a standard.

Stephen.


_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org