On 13/Oct/11 08:24, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> 
> The other idea I had borrows from a MIME extension:
> 
> Authentication-Results*0: ...
> DKIM-Domain*0: ...
> DKIM-Selector*0: ...
> 
> Authentication-Results*1: ...
> DKIM-Domain*1: ...
> DKIM-Selector*1: ...

If we stick to the "exactly one" A-R record, why would we need more
fields?  Each "resinfo" line already has all the information we need,
already correctly grouped --except for selectors, we miss header.s if
we don't want to retrieve s= from the third part, in the signature
having the corresponding header.b.

The only other data is the TXT RRs the verifier found.  We ought to
devise a format that allows as many of these as needed, with each
repeated field including the query as well.  It'd be a nuisance to
require different formatting according to the purpose of each RFC 1035
packet.

jm2c
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to