Subject: [ietf-dkim] another 4871 Errata filed

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:37:06 -0400

I just filed another errata against 4871. It reads as follows.

	Tony

Section 3.6.1 says:

N/A (see Notes below)

It should say:

Add text similar to the following:

Compatibility Note for DomainKeys

If a v= value is not found at the beginning of the DKIM key record,
the key record should be interpreted as for DomainKeys [4870]. The
definition given here is upwardly compatible with what is used for
DomainKeys, with the exception of the "g=" value. In a DomainKeys
key record, an empty "g=" value should be interpreted as being
equivalent to DKIM's "g=*".

Notes:

There should be a note added somewhere to section 3.6.1 saying
that if a v= is not found at the beginning of the DKIM key
record, the DNS key record should be interpreted as for DomainKeys
and described in RFC 4870. In addition, a note should be added
about the difference in the interpretation of an empty "g=",
which is the only incompatible tag.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html