Stephen Farrell wrote: > ssp-04 did revise the wildcard text, but not exactly as suggested > in the issue, nor am I clear about whether the new text satisfies > the couple of people (Eliot, Frank) who commented in the thread.
The version in ssp-04 IMO misses the following wildcard TXT points: (1) There is no explicitly specified way to identify an ADSP record, when it comes as one of several TXT records in a q=txt reply. In the terminology of an IAB draft ADSP defines no TXT subtype. (2) Even if ADSP would do this a set of wildcard TXT records for various purposes (compare RFCs 1464, 4406, 4408, and 3920bis) might be too long for UDP. (3) As a consequence of (1) ADSP likely doesn't work for wildcards. As a consequence of (2) the WG apparently refused to fix (1). A simple "MUST start with 'dkim='" (or similar) could fix it. Frank _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html