On Monday 28 August 2006 16:58, Michael Thomas wrote: > This has been discussed before, and the answer is that it doesn't work very > well. You can't, for instance, CNAME an interior node -- just leaf > nodes. For > DKIM, the ability to roll selector names pretty much means you'd want to > manage > the subtree not just a leaf. I expect for any sort of scale and/or key > management on > the target of the CNAME, you'd end up with a lot of broken links.
Thanks, But wouldn't Jim's suggestion of pre-creating extra CNAMES allow for key management by the operator? Keeping in mind that we are focused on small domains that don't have the ability to do subdomain NS delegation, do you think that for small scale the approach would be reasonably useful? Scott K _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
