DomainKeys was already made Historic when RFC 4870 was published in
2007. Look at the RFC status.
Barry
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 1:18 PM Jan Dušátko
wrote:
>
> Murray, Dave
>
> I would like to ask another question about the following.
> - DomainKey (RFC 4870) only allows signatures to be used with RSA-SHA1
> algorithm, which is now considered obsolete. I have not found support
> for other algorithms.
> - At the moment I am trying to monitor the frequency of signature
> occurrence with DomainKey and so far I have not found any occurrence. I
> would like to continue monitoring for about 3 months.
> - Given DomainKey's replacement with DKIM, the question is whether it
> would not be appropriate to declare DomainKey historic and no longer use
> it.
> In that case, there couldn't be problem to allow decomissioning of
> DomainKey.
>
> Regards
>
> Jan
>
> Dne 16. 5. 2023 v 18:00 Dave Crocker napsal(a):
> > On 5/16/2023 8:52 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> >> Also, a change to make this REQUIRED would take forever for the world
> >> to adapt.
> > As noted, if it's a TXT record and it is in a DKIM DNS naming path, it
> > better be a DKIM record.
> >
> > Also, versions numbers are pretty much useless. So leaving it out
> > does little damage.
> >
> > If a version change marks addition of some features, then the presence
> > of the features' markings are self-indicating.
> >
> > If a version change marks a change to the basic standard -- ie, a
> > change that is incompatible with the previous version -- then it is
> > not a version change. It is creation of a new protocol.
> >
> > c/
> >
>
> --
> -- --- - -
> Jan Dušátko
>
> Tracker number: +420 602 427 840
> e-mail: j...@dusatko.org
> GPG Signature: https://keys.dusatko.org/E535B585.asc
> GPG Encrypt:https://keys.dusatko.org/B76A1587.asc
>
> ___
> Ietf-dkim mailing list
> Ietf-dkim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
___
Ietf-dkim mailing list
Ietf-dkim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
