Folks,
In: <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q2/011959.html> Steve Atkins posted a list of suggested DKIM features to drop. This note is intended to anchor a discussion thread for discusses one of those features, namely: > TXT RR tags > t=y: Domain is testing DKIM > > A "test flag" is a little like the version field, except there's much > less history of it's use in Internet standards. It isn't that useful, > and may cause problems. > > It seems a questionable choice to define something into a protocol > that's almost immediately useless. Testing takes place only during > startup, then everyone has to support it forever, even though it's > never used again. In the case of DKIM it's also unclear how this would > be useful, as there's no obvious way for a receiver to communicate to > a sender the result of a DKIM validation in testing mode other than an > arrangement outside of the protocol - in which case the testing flag > wouldn't need to be part of the protocol. > > Is anyone supporting t=y in a DKIM validator? What does it do in terms > of delivery and communication with the sender that's different to > normal non-test usage? And is it useful? > > g: Granularity of the key > s: Service type > t=s: Require that domain in i= and d= are the same > > All three of these exist to ask the DKIM validator to compensate for > the domain owners lack of control over usage inside the domain owners > area of control. They don't belong in the basic DKIM signing mechanism. > > If they're thought to be useful to identify and control different > aspects of use, what are they, or what are they thought likely to be? Please discuss arguments for and against dropping this. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
