Subject: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: wildcard selectors

From: "John R. Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 12 Apr 2011 21:07:49 -0400

3.6.2.1, Namespace: remove INFORMATIVE OPERATIONAL NOTE about wildcards, 
because the first sentence is just plain false.

Key records with wildcards in the selector work perfectly well.  I've been 
using them for months. They're a dandy way to track who's verifying your 
signatures, by putting a different selector in each signature.

There's language elsewhere to warn about totally wildcarded domains, so 
there's no need to put replacement language here.

Regards,
John Levine, [email-masked], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:20:10 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of John R. Levine
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 6:08 PM
> To: DKIM List
> Subject: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: wildcard selectors
> 

Concur.

---

From: "J.D. Falk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:28:30 -0700

>> because the first sentence is just plain false.

+1

--
J.D. Falk
the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions