[ietf-dkim] The key record upgrade attack

[Paul Hoffman]

At 9:29 AM -0700 8/4/06, Douglas Otis wrote:
>On Aug 4, 2006, at 9:23 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
>>At 8:38 AM -0700 8/4/06, Douglas Otis wrote:
>>>During a transition, it would be important to communicate what 
>>>will be offered and what has been deprecated.  Then these options 
>>>MUST be available or the related signatures MUST be ignored.
>>
>>The SSP document *cannot* change the way implementers of the -base 
>>document process signatures. "MUST be ignored" changes the logic of 
>>-base.
>
>Interesting catch.  This point was raised however during base, but ignored.

It was not ignored; it was actively rejected.