[ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

To save bandwidth - I'm +1 on steve's list - in particular the ones
you posted surveys for, so far.

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:45 PM, Dave CROCKER <dcrocker at bbiw.net> wrote:
>>    TXT RR tags
>
>>      k: Key type
>>
>> Much the same as h=, with the added issue that there's only one
>> possible key type right now, and if there were a need for k= in the
>> future it could be added in the same RFC that adds support for
>> anything other than RSA.