[ietf-dkim] Escaping things in key/ADSP records
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at cloudmark.com
Mon Aug 3 10:28:42 PDT 2009
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
> bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:59 AM
> To: DKIM WG
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Escaping things in key/ADSP records
> For typical DKIM users though, commenting on an invalid field as "This
> is probably invalid, but there might be an experimental I-D that's
> using it, so maybe it's OK and receivers may or may not ignore it" is
> going to be far more confusing than "This is wrong, fix it." - as if
> they're using "r=" it's probably a typo or a misunderstanding, rather
> than intentional use of an experimental field.
How about: "The following tags are non-standard and will likely be ignored by most verifiers"?
Some of Tony's examples such as "h=rsa-sha1" can certainly be reported as "invalid" as they are standardized tags with illegal values (i.e., the legal values are enumerated).
> It might be interesting to have an alternate checker that tracks the
> additional fields being discussed in active I-Ds too, though. Is there
> a registry of experimental fields or list of I-Ds anywhere?
Alas, no. And it would be difficult, I think, to try to corral people into using one in general (though the audience is currently pretty small so for now it's a practical idea).
More information about the ietf-dkim