ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms

2006-02-22 10:56:10
Ned Freed wrote:
I'm sorry, but it is folly to think you have a choice in the matter. There has
to be at least one mandatory to implement mechanism to insure all
implementations can interoperate. 
Most of the time I would buy this Ned, but the ramifications of NOT
interoperating are not at all clear here.  The worst is that you don't
show the message as verified.  And while that is a deployment and not an
implementation consideration, why force people to implement something we
know we're transitioning away from?  It doesn't matter so much today. 
Everyone today is going to implement SHA-1.  But it matters 2 - 3 years
down the road, when that decision shouldn't be forced by the IETF.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html