[ietf-dkim] Re: Thoughts on the DNS RR issue

[Frank Ellermann]

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

> _prefix.exists.example.com    TXT     "Policy1"
> *.example.com                 CNAME   _wildcard.example.com
> _prefix._wildcard.example.com TXT     "Policy2"

[...] 
> This algorithm is 100% compatible with the deployed, legacy
> DNS and meets all use cases that were proposed for
> wildcarding.

If it works (I'm unfortuately a DNS ignorant, although the SPF
adventure helped to get some basic ideas) it's cute.  Did I
get this right, the real trick is a convention to look for and
interpret an _wildcard.example.com alias if there's no direct
hit ?

That should be an I-D of its own.  As you said the SPF-solution
to support both SPF and TXT in parallel for years is not very
convincing (but still better than abusing TXT forever).

> If this mechanism was adopted as policy for ALL prefixed
> records there would no longer be any need to define new RRs
> unless there was a need to define a new record syntax.

Better stick to TXT with this convention.  Snipping the rest
because it's beyond me.  You probably need a IANA registry of
_prefix-es following your _wildcard convention.  Bye, Frank