On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
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.
Either way it seems like a severe waste of time to do that rather than
make DKIM2 work. I see no chance that DKIM2 or EKIM or whatever we call
it will use the same signature header so it's purely hypothetical anyway.
Compatibility allows for step-wise adoption and migration. Incompatibility
forces double signing forever.
We'll have to disagree about that.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
