I make no assumption on the question of TXT versus other DNS RR's at
all. I view this topic to be totally orthogonal to the DNS question and
unrelated. I see having o=~ as difficult to remember, describe and use,
irrespective of what the DNS record looks like otherwise.
Tony Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark Delany wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 10:45:31PM -0500, Tony Hansen allegedly wrote:
>> As promised at the dkim meeting, I'm resending a suggestion about o=
>> that was sent in November and again in February.
>>
>> At the Wednesday meeting, it was suggested that we replace the single
>> character o=? (etc.) tags with tags like o=WEAK (etc.). The thrust of
>> the messages was that we should use something that is even more meaningful.
>
> One question Tony. Are you assuming that TXT will remain as the only
> Policy/Practice retrieval mechanism? If a new RR is eventually
> described, does that obviate the need to anglicize the current format?
> Or does that depend on when "eventually" is?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
