The point of passing i= is to allow extension in the future to
possible per-user keying. You wouldn't do this in DNS, but another
protocol should be able to handle it easily.
eric
--On May 31, 2006 2:45:30 PM -0700 Jim Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Section 3.6 gives an abstract definition of a key lookup function,
which is good in generalizing the description of this process
beyond the dns/txt representation. However, it includes i= as a
parameter in the lookup. Is there ever a situation where q (lookup
type), d (domain) and s (selector) aren't sufficient? I view i
(the local part, in particular) as something that gets compared
with the g value in the result, but not a key for the lookup,
independent of the type of key service used.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
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
