Douglas Otis wrote: > Use a host-name convention. This would be apparent at the > EHLO without requiring negotiations. In essences, > _dkim.mx01.example.com makes an assurance that: > 1) this host-name will authenticate > 2) a DKIM client policy can be applied
Some minimal negotiation might be still necessary, the server could reject the underscore in the EHLO as 2821 syntax error, based on "sub-domain = Let-dig [Ldh-str]", an underscore is no <Let-dig>. Depending on how the server does this the client might have to start the conversation from scratch. Hang on, now I see that your example says _dkim.mx01.example, is it the server using an underscore, in MX records ? Or in the greeting ? It's not that I'm against any "updates: 2821", but I'd like to know if it's the direction you talk about. Frank _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
