Eric Allman wrote:
I'm thinking of the following addition to the p= description in 3.6.1:
INFORMATIVE NOTE: A base64string is permitted to include white space
(LWSP) at arbitrary places; however, any CRLFs must be followed by at
least one WSP character. Implementors and administrators are cautioned
to ensure that selector TXT records conform to this specification.
Not to be too jaded, but does anybody think this will have any practical
effect whatsoever? I would lay long odds that whoever put that key into
their DNS didn't read the DKIM spec -- or at least read it with kind of
critical eye.
What would actually be better here, IMO, is to find out _how_ this
happened. That is, is this a pathological case for a DNS server we
ought to care about. If this just a random one off misconfiguration,
I'm not sure what the point is for introducing more text with its
inherent potential of itself being misconstrued...
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html