[ietf-dkim] Today's jabber

[Eric Allman]

I think it's valuable to have the base spec define a "must implement" 
set of semantics.  Connecting that to the representation will 
obviously differ depending on many things, not the least of which 
being text vs. binary representations.

Since -base is (now) only defining TXT, it seems to make sense for 
that to remain the definition syntax.  [Posix tried to define 
abstract semantics and then binding for each language.  This was a 
disaster and after losing at least a year of time they went back to 
using C as the definition language.]

It probably does make sense clarifying that /any/ representation has 
to include these basic values with the same semantics, but make it 
clear that the syntax is specific to TXT records and may or may not 
apply to others.  I tried to do that by saying that the defined 
representation SHOULD be used for any text-based system, but perhaps 
I didn't go far enough.

eric



--On May 18, 2006 7:25:25 PM +0000 Mark Delany 
<MarkD+dkim at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 11:55:51AM -0700, Michael Thomas allegedly
> wrote:
>> Mark Delany wrote:
>>
>> >> OLD:	TXT records are encoded as described in Section 3.6.1.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > So I've circulated the draft DKK to a couple of people to get the
>> > roughest edges off.
>> >
>> > One of the big questions asked in that draft relates to the
>> > relationship between TXT and DKK semantics. Which one is
>> > authoritative and which one is a mirror? Or should base be
>> > authoritative and both the TXT and DKK simply be particular
>> > representations?
>> >
>> >
>> Is there really any reason to force one to be the master of the
>> other?
>
> Simply to avoid duplication of semantics. I was merely asking which
> text is the source of truth and where should it reside. Also,
> presumably if a DKK springs into existence, the TXT may well be
> frozen at some point with new functionality only going into the DKK
> RR.
>
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
>