----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Ellermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Douglas Otis wrote: > > [base-00 3.5 x=] > > The MUST in the draft may be a bit harsh. > > Yes, s/MUST/SHOULD/ makes sense, e.g. if a MUA behind IMAP > wants to check signatures. Editorial nit: Splitting 3.5 in > subsections for the various "field types" could be a good idea. > Just a follow up to my previous message. This section says the default is NO expiration. That isn't going to work very well :-) A DKIM message will no expiration will quickly moving into a reject classification if other issues are found with the message. This will be especially the case with key policy "t=y" testing flag (section 3.6.1). This section should make the x= mandatory for t=y key policies and should recommend a short expiration for testing. A long "testing period" with problematic DKIM messages should not be tolerated. -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://dkim.org/ietf-list-rules.html
