>
> > TXT RR tags
>
> > k: Key type
> >
> > Much the same as h=, with the added issue that there's only one
> > possible key type right now, and if there were a need for k= in the
> > future it could be added in the same RFC that adds support for
> > anything other than RSA.
>
Dropping this to remove clutter seems like a reasonable idea, but it would be
necessary to meet a couple of conditions to prevent breakage due to the number
of existing records with this tag.
- implementations would have to ignore any tags they don't recognize
(this should already be required, so should be no problem)
- if this functionality is added back in later, it needs to be done in
a way that breaks neither records with k tags nor records without a key type
specifier (again, backwards compatibility requirements should make this
obvious, but if enough time elapses it's possible people will forget about the
existing k tags).
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
