ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=

2006-04-10 09:16:44

[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman

The receiver *could* honor the signature forever, just as 
they can with an x= tag. But, in doing so, they would be 
going against the semantics of the DKIM signature.

I think it is necessary to distinguish between protocol semantics and court
room semantics.

The x= tage would do nothing to change the significance of the signature in
a court of law. People seem to have the idea that putting x= would allow
repudiation after the time expired, it does not.

I don't see that it has any relevance to protocol semantics unless a mail
server starts re-injecting old mail, as occasionally happens. Every so often
an old machine is rebooted and starts executing the old mail queue.


If a party wants the x= semantic the easiest way to do it is to roll their
key distribution points (they can even use the same key).

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html