Well it would be nice if i=author.net and d=3rd.party.signer.isp.com but no one agreed so I'll shut up now :-)
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 6:14 PM To: DKIM WG Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend) On Jun 16, 2009, at 2:35 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: > > > 1) People saying that d= is THE IDENTIFIER are overloading the > value: d= a routing > label to a particular DNS subtree. Whether it has anything to do > with THE > IDENTIFIER is purely coincidental. The assumption that these two > functions are > identical is bogus. i= was supposed to be this stable value > detached from the > mechanical DNS routing function. Are you confusing the d= value and the DNS node (including selectors and suchlike) that the public key lives at? The d= value has been the persistent identifier for the signer since day one, while the i= value is a more specific value that the signer can optionally use. Given that the RHS of i= is either identical or a subdomain of d= it's nonsensical to consider i= more stable than d=, as i= must change if d= does. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
