Dave Crocker wrote:
Well, it's not *exactly* it: there's still SHA-1. Two upgrades
in the space of a few years is going to be painful. Maybe inevitable,
but still painful.
DKIM's base spec already has a mechanism that supports alternate
algorithms.
Are there any changes to the mechanism that anyone is suggesting?
Unless we're resigned to signers generating two signatures in the
interim, it's not quite this simple. There's an inherent chicken/egg
problem with signers only generating the new/better signature.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html