On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Hector Santos wrote:
I was thinking about this and wasn't sure if it was worth bringing up. I
mean, in DSAP we have failure-handling statements, but I can go either way.
But let me throw out the idea of the domain wishing to express a disclaimer
that is something failures, it is HIGHLY desirable that you not retain this
message. I provided an example in DSAP:
_dsap._domainkey.bank.example. IN TXT
"v=dsap1.0; a=rsa-sha256; op=always; 3p=never;
n=We only send DKIM signed email, do not trust anything else
such as notices allegedly from
security(_at_)bank(_dot_)example(_dot_) Please
report all such abuse to;
r=phishing-reports(_at_)bank(_dot_)example;"
Where using the N= note tag, the domain making an disclaimer statement to
the verifier not to trust the message.
So maybe just adding a new requirement?
Protocol MUST allow for a informational text note for the policy.
This is not a good for requirement precisely because the note is
of information use (basicly you already can put whatever else
extra in the record in additional undefined tag). The good thing
about pre-defined tag as with 'n' is that it reserves it for
something that will not be in use in the future become functional
record parameter. In any case this is precisely a design issue
and not for generalized requirement.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html