Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Monday 28 August 2006 16:58, Michael Thomas wrote:
This has been discussed before, and the answer is that it doesn't work very
well. You can't, for instance, CNAME an interior node -- just leaf
nodes. For
DKIM, the ability to roll selector names pretty much means you'd want to
manage
the subtree not just a leaf. I expect for any sort of scale and/or key
management on
the target of the CNAME, you'd end up with a lot of broken links.
Thanks,
But wouldn't Jim's suggestion of pre-creating extra CNAMES allow for key
management by the operator?
Keeping in mind that we are focused on small domains that don't have the
ability to do subdomain NS delegation, do you think that for small scale the
approach would be reasonably useful?
That assumes you know what the operator will name the new selectors -- that
seems a bit problematic in the large, but for some situations might be
ok. I didn't
even realize the Jim was using CNAME's for his selectors...
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html