Re: [dmarc-ietf] DKIM libraries, was Third Party Sender DMARC Adaptations

2015-04-03 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 7:42 PM, John Levine wrote: > In answer to someone else's question, libdkim is inded the Alt-N > library which as far as I can tell hasn't been touched since 2008. > It still seems to work OK, and it checks the v= in the signature > to be "1" or some old 0.x test versions.

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DKIM libraries, was Third Party Sender DMARC Adaptations

2015-04-03 Thread John Levine
In article you write: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Looks like we require v to exist and be either 1 or DKIM1, otherwise you'll >get a "bad format" or "bad version" in the AuthRes header. Wonder how old >the DKIM1 is and whether we should remove that now... The DNS key record has to say v=DKIM1