> On Apr 12, 2018, at 8:27 AM, Ken O'Driscoll via mailop <mailop@mailop.org> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > While the "v=DKIM1" is RECOMMENDED as opposed to REQUIRED I have always > included it in the DNS record and this appears to be the norm. > > However, I have recently been dealing with a provider doesn't include it in > either their shared public key or when providing the generated public key > to the client (for whitelabeling). > > Personally I don't like this practice because I believe that the "v=DKIM1" > has become so ubiquitous that at least someone has coded a validator that > treats it as required. > > Interested in what others think of this.
I believe the history behind it not being REQUIRED is so that during transition you could publish a single record that was both a valid DKIM key and a valid DomainKeys key. If I were writing a validator I wouldn't require it. If I were publishing a key record I would, even though leaving it out is entirely within spec and even though the only semantic value it really adds is "this is not a DomainKeys key". If nothing else, it makes it clearer what someone's intent was when that RHS is in a TXT record at example.com or _spf.example.com or _dkim.example.com or _dmarc.example.com ... If you're providing it to a customer for them to put into their DNS that's probably relevant. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
