On Tue 01/Apr/2025 19:07:40 +0200 John R Levine wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Sorry for being unclear. What I meant was that, given DKIM2, a DKIM1 verifier
could be updated to handle DKIM2 signatures —if DKIM2 signatures were
specified with compatibility in mind.
That makes no sense at all. Why would you waste time making a semi-broken DKIM
verifier rather than just using a DKIM2 verifier? It's just a software library.
The resulting DKIM verifier is not semi-broken, it's DKIM2-tolerant. And it's
not just a library change, it's also the MTA interface.
Compatibility allows for step-wise adoption and migration. Incompatibility
forces double signing forever.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
