[ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration
dhc at dcrocker.net
Sat May 30 10:12:47 PDT 2009
Steve Atkins posted a list of suggested DKIM features to drop.
This note is intended to anchor a discussion thread for discusses one of those
> DKIM-Signature Header tags
> x: Signature expiration
> Expiration is a fairly common feature in signing specifications. But
> DK and DKIM are different in that the public key is not distributed to
> others, it's always under the control of the signer. Does this add
> anything that removing the DNS TXT record doesn't do? Is it used? Is
> it necessary?
Please discuss arguments for and against dropping this.
More information about the ietf-dkim