[ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=

[Bill.Oxley at cox.com]

Current
x=   Signature Expiration (plain-text; RECOMMENDED, default is no
       expiration).  The format is the same as in the "t=" tag,
       represented as an absolute date, not as a time delta from the
       signing timestamp.  Signatures MUST NOT be considered valid if
       the current time at the verifier is past the expiration date.
       The value is expressed as an unsigned integer in decimal ASCII,
       with the same constraints on the value in the "t=" tag.  The
value
       of the "x=" tag MUST be greater than the value of the "t=" tag if
       both are present.

           INFORMATIVE NOTE:  The x= tag is not intended as an anti-
           replay defense.

Proposed
x=    Expiration date (plain-text; RECOMMENDED, default is no
       expiration).  The format is the same as in the "t=" tag,
       represented as an absolute date, not as a time delta from the
       signing timestamp.  Signatures MUST NOT be considered valid if
       the current time at the verifier is past the expiration date.
       The value is expressed as an unsigned integer in decimal ASCII,
       with the same constraints on the value in the "t=" tag.  The
value
       of the "x=" tag MUST be greater than the value of the "t=" tag if
       both are present.

           INFORMATIVE NOTE:  The x= tag is not intended as an anti-
           replay defense. Its proposed use is to indicate Key/Signature
expiration. When message is considered expired It becomes the
policy of the verifier on how to further process the message.


Bill Oxley 
Messaging Engineer 
Cox Communications, Inc. 
Alpharetta GA 
404-847-6397 
bill.oxley at cox.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 4:58 PM
To: ietf-dkim
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=


Results are in:

Keep (8)

jonathan.clark at mirapoint.com
mike at mtcc.com
hsantos at santronics.com
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
pbaker at verisign.com
william at elan.net
dennis at thenose.net
jon at callas.org

Remove (9)

johnl at iecc.com
dotis at mail-abuse.org
phoffman at proper.com
MarkD+dkim at yahoo-inc.com
lear at cisco.com
fenton at cisco.com
mlibbeymail-mailsig at yahoo.com
dkim at mx.rdns.org (Jim Hill)
tony at att.com

And that includes a vote that changed sides! Let me know
if I've missed anyone, but I suspect it won't make a
difference really.

So there is no clear consensus to delete x=, therefore
we go with the status quo.

Could I ask that someone try propose text for the draft
to clarify the meaning of x=, bearing in mind all of
the list discussion?

Stephen.


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html