ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2009-06-01 15:29:03
On 6/1/09 6:38 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
I would assume that if it were added back it would look exactly like it
does now, but with some additional options other than "rsa".

Adding k= back or extending it to support other options would
both require RFC level effort, so I'd expect anyone doing that
would do the research on the history (or, more likely, be on
this mailing list right now :) ).

   

The problem is that it is almost a certainty that it won't be "if" but 
"when".  Why make work?  This goes to Russ' point about algorithm 
agility.  On the other hand, I agree that having options with only one 
value invites hardcoding and improper processing.  Perhaps Russ would 
like to comment further?

Eliot


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