Murray, > I have a patch with which I'm experimenting to address the inaccurate "DNS > reply truncated" problem. We mitigated this with _FFR_DNS_UPGRADE but > I've since learned that libdkim might be making the truncation decision in > a far too simple way; replies marked with the DNS "tc" (truncation) flag > might still be completely usable and _FFR_DNS_UPGRADE could be > unnecessary.
Nice. > Is anyone interested in trying the patch? Also, does anyone still have an > oversized key record in DNS I can use for testing the patch? I promise to > be nice to your nameserver! I still have the keys of different sizes: 1800, 1824, 1872 and 2048 bits. Attached is a test file, signed with all of them. All four signatures should be valid. Mark
test.msg.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ dkim-milter-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dkim-milter-discuss
