DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Authorized Third-Party Signatures
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 16 and is now closed.
(Stephen Farrell) (was Discuss) Yes
(Sean Turner) Yes
(Ron Bonica) No Objection
(Stewart Bryant) No Objection
(Ralph Droms) No Objection
(Adrian Farrel) No Objection
Comment (2012-01-02 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
Thank you for advancing this work as Experimental and for taking the time to describe the experimental process.
(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Pete Resnick) No Objection
Comment (2012-01-03 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
1. "ATPS" is never expanded in the text before its use. Please do so in the intro. 2. The ABNF for atps-query should put an upper limit of 63 for the number of BASE32 characters: atps-query = 1*63BASE32 %x2e.5f.188.8.131.52.2e domain-name 3. Is there reason to believe that, in practice, the hashing is really needed? Do we really believe that the combination of the two domain names will exceed 255 characters? 4. Given that this is an experiment, is there any reason not to give this a go with a new DNS query type? (Yeah, yeah, I know. But I thought I'd ask.)
(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection
Comment (2012-01-04 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
This is a fine document. It's especially helpful to describe how the experiment will be run. I have one small comment: please consider adding a brief sentence about internationalized domain names (IDNs). I realize that RFC 6376 specifies encoding of IDNs as A-labels, but it might be good to reinforce that message here, such as (in Section 4.2): "domain-name" and "key-h-tag-alg" are defined in [DKIM]. Note that according to [DKIM] internationalized domain names are to be encoded as A-labels, as described in Section 2.3 of [RFC5890]. This would necessitate adding an informative reference to RFC 5890, if you decide to make such a change.