Re: [dmarc-ietf] Which DKIM(s) should be reported? (Ticket #38)

[Дилян Палаузов <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

lets say a site signs an email with both rsa and ed25519 algorithms.  This site wants to know, whether the recipient can validate the ed25519 signatures, so that in the future rsa signing for that receiving site can be skipped (or errors in the ed25519 implementation fixed).

For this to work the receiving site must put in the report information about each aligned dkim signature, saying which public key-name was used.

Greetings
  Дилян

On January 25, 2021 2:25:13 AM GMT+02:00, "Brotman, Alex" <Alex_Brotman=[e-mail]> wrote:
>Hello folks,
>
>Some time ago, an issue[1] was brought to the list where which DKIM(s)
>being reported is not clear in RFC7489 [2].  There was a short
>discussion, though no clear resolution before conversation trailed off.
>It seems like there were points that may need to be discussed.  One was
>whether the reporting SHOULD report all signatures, regardless of
>alignment or validity, or perhaps just the one that aligns (if there is
>one).  There was also another question if there should be a limit to
>the number of signatures reported so that it remains sane.
>
>We'd like to try to get this resolved within about two weeks.  Thank
>you for your feedback.
>
>1:
>https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/9-V596yl2BBaUzCNaDZB1Tg1s4c/
>2: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-7.2
>
>--
>Alex Brotman
>Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy
>Comcast
>
>_______________________________________________
>dmarc mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc