[ietf-dkim] Issue 1576: Revise wildcard discussion

[Frank Ellermann]

Stephen Farrell wrote:

> Can I ask those who think that the current text is not sufficient
> to please suggest alternative text?

"ADSP records always start with 'dkim=', syntax:
 record   = "dkim=" strength *[ FWS pair ] [FWS]
 strength = "unknown" / "all" / "discardable"
 pair     = name [FWS] "=" [FWS] value
 name     = ALPHA [*( ALPHA / "-" ) ALPHA ]
 value    = 1*<VCHAR>
   
 Each <name> has to be registered and can be used at most once in a
 record.  A <name> is cases-insensitive.  The special <name> "dkim"
 is required and used in the form "dkim=unknown, "dkim=all", or
 dkim=discradable" to start an ADSP record."

Later in the wildcard section replace the "ADSP won't work" blurb
with the real problem:  "Depending on the size of all wildcard TXT
records combined the DNS reply won't fit into an UDP datagram, and
might not make it to the party interested in the ADSP TXT record."

Add a reference to the wildcard RFC 4592, see also this related 
thread:  <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.dkim/10528>
'Documenting "why" the horse is dead'

 Frank