Subject: [ietf-dkim] features and versions and running code

From: "John R. Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 10 Feb 2018 13:43:56 -0500

>  The current point of departure into DKIM is by the header field name. So I'm
>  not sure why 'other than' is being queried, since it's the natural, existing
>  point for going to a different protocol.

Hmmn.  Yesterday someone seemed to agree that keeping the same header name 
would make life easier for all the code that looks for a DKIM-Signature header 
to decide whether to call the DKIM library, since in any sensible scenario the 
old and new DKIM headers are handled by one library with a single verification 
interface.  Has he changed his mind?

R's,
John

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html