It appears that Brotman, Alex <[email protected]> said: >How will we handle the ever-changing definition of "weak"?
Looking at the mail archive, the weak signatures we discussed were from my conditional resigning draft, which has nothing whatsoever to do with cryptographically weak signatures. Doug appears to have completely misunderstood the point. There is no reason for DMARC to say anything at all about either flavor of weak signature. We need to stop fooling around and ship it. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
