wayne wrote:
>> The SSP part is short enough to be mirrored in SPF, either
>> inline as "modifier", or as its own record using the same
>> record type 99.
> I think this would be A Bad Idea because neither of the DKIM
> records have a required magic number at the beinning of the
> record.
Adding that is trivial, and "inline" the name of the modifier
already does it. But if there's no chance to save DNS queries
the idea - bad or not - is almost useless, it would only avoid
to get a new RR type for SSP. In that case I'm not hot about
it. But if it saves DNS queries I'm intrigued - after reading
Doug's "hundreds of DNS queries" articles in MARID ;-)
Bye, Frank
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org
