Sorry "This proposes modifying DKIM1 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6376.html> to make use of algebra to reverse the changes." was poorly phrased. DKIM1 signatures are not modified, nor when to sign. However, what I meant to say is that verification is changed to allow a DKIM2-aware receiver to verify using RFC6376 and to also use DKIM1-SIGNATURE. If it likes the answer from DKIM1-SIGNATURE, it may elect to use that result instead of RFC6376. -Wei
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:52 AM John Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > It appears that Wei Chuang <[email protected]> said: > >This proposes modifying DKIM1 < > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6376.html> > >to make use of algebra to reverse the changes. > > I think that's a non-starter. If people are going to change their DKIM > software, > why would they implement mutant DKIM1 rather than DKIM2? > > It's hard to see how we can do better than telling people to sign in > parallel. > > R's, > John >
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
