IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 22 March 2017 02:31 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439721200A0 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pi7pNwZBrBOQ for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:31:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67BAD12942F for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:31:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 89122 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2017 02:31:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 22 Mar 2017 02:31:55 -0000
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 02:31:33 -0000
Message-ID: <20170322023133.72699.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dispatch@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVB3ztkaN3YuQbaVG4znh_3XNu_SWN+9KNmZ66zVF-R+g@mail.gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/aoSfwQmA33lcsr6p9H3XeY8tAXc>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 02:31:59 -0000

In article <CABkgnnVB3ztkaN3YuQbaVG4znh_3XNu_SWN+9KNmZ66zVF-R+g@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>On 22 March 2017 at 01:05, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>> Given the difficulty of opening up specs, if we're going to do anything I'd
>> like to both add the new algorithm and the option to publish key hashes.
>
>This sounds fine, though I'd disagree with the premise.  I'm sure that
>you can write an extension specification that doesn't even have to
>update DKIM.  It just says, you can implement this in addition to DKIM
>and it makes the keys bigger and better.

I suppose but it wouldn't make much sense.  We designed DKIM so we can add
new hashes and signing algorithms.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email