On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 05:36:15PM -0400, John R Levine wrote:
>
>> >I am happy to see that the openpgpkey draft reinvigorated the email people
>> >into looking at a solution for the generic email address to recipient
>> >mapping.
>>
>> I'll be sending one along shortly.
>
> If we're reconsidering the design, perhaps a smaller thing to
> reconsider is the idea (IIRC my fault) to use SHA-224 in an attempt
> to handle long (> 63 octet) local-parts, and avoid false matches
> due to case folding.
>
> An alternative is to go back to the original base32 encoding, which
> is lossless, and thus can allow the remote DNS server (a special-purpose
> DNS lookup engine serving a zone with per-user information) to
> decode the local-part and perform whatever fuzzy matching may be
> appropriate.
>
> The lossless encoding can support longer names by breaking them up
> into multiple labels.
>
> This allows static DNS to be published where desired, and custom
> code to produce dynamic results when appropriate.

I like this.  A lookup protocol would be optional.  But I think we
need to specify the lookup protocol, and MUAs [that support DANE for
PGP/S/MIME] will need to support it.  The lookup protocol can only be
optional to provide; it can't be optional on the client-side.

Nico
--

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

Reply via email to