Steve Atkins wrote: > Not only does hatstand.beartrap.blighty.com not resolve, it's not > registered anywhere. It exists solely as a substring of the string > that's actually queried - > banjo.aardvark._domainkey.hatstand.beartrap.blighty.com > > The only thing that can be said about the SDID in DNS terms is that > the signer of the mail has the ability to add TXT records in the > subtree rooted at that domain. > > Given that, trying to make more specific statements about what the > SDID is than something vague like "a domain name" is likely to lead to > something that's misleading or plain wrong. > > -1 on "registered" or "resolvable".
Sounds like the real requirement is that a DKIM verifier be able to figure out which key to use, based on that string. There must be an IETF standard way to describe that.... -- J.D. Falk Return Path Inc http://www.returnpath.net/ _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
