On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Dave Crocker <dcroc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The irony of your suggestion is that it requires having 'unupgraded' > software reliably use the version number, given that they haven't needed > to do that before either... > Section 6.1.1 of DKIM makes it a MUST that unknown versions result in an error. Are you assuming here that some/many/most implementations will have ignored that? You might be right; I'm just trying to be clear. For that matter, can we assume "x=" was properly implemented? It would indeed be ideal to find a way to ensure that the delegation signature is disregarded by legacy DKIM implementations, and only used when coupled with a passing Mediator signature. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
