On Tue, 23 Jun 2026, Stephen Farrell wrote:
For DKIM2, you could credibly go with recommending either -44 or -65 for those who want a PQ option. I don't currently see a winning argument in favour of picking one over the other for a RECOMMENDED statement tbh - -44 involves fewer bits but -65 might result in almost nobody trying to turn it up to 11, achieving more consistency.
Hmmn. The key for -65 is 1952 bytes which expands to base64 2602. That's not an implausibly large DNS record, but it means that the TXT record will have a dozen strings which I expect will tax people's cutting and pasting skills. I suppose we could say something about using CNAMEs to outsource the cutting and pasting to more competent organizations.
R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
