ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type

2009-06-01 12:19:25

   TXT RR tags

     k: Key type

Much the same as h=, with the added issue that there's only one
possible key type right now, and if there were a need for k= in the
future it could be added in the same RFC that adds support for
anything other than RSA.

Dropping this to remove clutter seems like a reasonable idea, but it would be 
necessary to meet a couple of conditions to prevent breakage due to the number 
of existing records with this tag. 

        - implementations would have to ignore any tags they don't recognize 
(this should already be required, so should be no problem)

        - if this functionality is added back in later, it needs to be done in 
a way that breaks neither records with k tags nor records without a key type 
specifier (again, backwards compatibility requirements should make this 
obvious, but if enough time elapses it's possible people will forget about the 
existing k tags). 

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