[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Scott
Kitterman
Might it be useful to break the exact crypto algorithm out
into a separate (very short) RFC so that it can be revised as
necessary? Something like:
A validator MUST support all crypto algorithms listed as
not deprecated in RFC ZZZZ or it's successors, initially
{SHA-1, SHA-256}.
Good intention, bad idea. Essentially you have created a future
dependency so the requirements for implementing DKIM now change over
time. It is now impossible to interpret the statement 'complies with RFC
XXXX' without knowing when the claim was made.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html