ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1576: Revise wildcard discussion

2008-07-07 15:14:58
That being the case, requiring that ADSP records always start with something 
distinctive such as 'dkim=' would allow an ADSP checker to quickly ignore an 
unintended TXT record.

Well, maybe.  There's plenty of other ways a record can be ill-formed.

*.foo.example TXT "dkim=none dkim=discard"
*.foo.example TXT "dkim=a total crock nobody is gonna use"

Doesn't it make sense to add the requirement for efficiency, not for 
subtyping reasons?

It's hard for me to imagine that the cost of scanning a few dozen bytes of 
TXT record is going to be perceptible, and I'd rather not introduce new 
rules that are likely to encourage people to jump to unwarranted 
conclusions, e.g., that anything that starts with dkim= is valid.

R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>