-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
In message <[email protected]>, John R
Levine <[email protected]> writes
>On Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Wei Chuang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> s
>>>> : Any DKIM2 signature header fields using the "i=" tag MUST have
>
>> Sure that sounds good to me. My plan was to state that it is deprecated
>> for DKIM2, rather than deleting the text. Indeed this text is a leftover
>> from DKIM1 where consensus wasn't clear, but glad it's being clarified.
>
>I don't see any reason to keep tags just because they were in DKIM1. The
>signatures are completely different, and there's no point to sorta kinda
>backward compatibility.
yes ,,, but one of the points of Wei's draft was to supersede the
description of keys in the DKIM1 spec whilst providing a spec for DKIM2
so these flags need to be described, but with a clear indication that
they mean nothing to DKIM2 and that although they impact DKIM1
implemenations no-one smart sets the flags any more
- --
richard @ highwayman . com "Nothing seems the same
Still you never see the change from day to day
And no-one notices the customs slip away"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBanoPWGHfC/FfW545EQLNagCeK0qPSwjzFBYmKsNH/ReAOA+xZLwAmwWP
O84s3RdliAW4YuRIfSj+cV8E
=qy8J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
