ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] (registered) domain name (Re: errata revision: opaque)

2009-03-27 11:33:30

On Mar 27, 2009, at 4:37 AM, John Levine wrote:

well, now I'm completely confused.  to my eyes, your example fits
exactly what 'registered' and 'resolvable' mean, but I guess you
have something else in mind.

Steve is quite right.  Since the DKIM key records are at different
names from the related MX or A record, the existence of one doesn't
require or imply the existence of the other.

I don't want to hold up this errata/update/whatever any more than it
already is, so I'd suggest taking out any wording about the DNS status
of the SDID.

+1

One of us should send in a separate technical erratum saying that DKIM
key records SHOULD be published only for SDID domains that have
corresponding MX or A records and can receive mail.

Any reason for that? It doesn't strike me as an obviously good idea.

Cheers,
   Steve

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

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