On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 06:35:47AM -0800, william(at)elan.net allegedly wrote: > Not necessarily. One of the proposals that went into DKIM had characteristic > of storing public key fingerprints in dns. This seems quite close to DK but > has a number of advantages and unlike DKIM or DK does not put serious extra > pressure on DNS infrastructure Unproved speculation. As you know, email, compared to HTTP and P2P (neither of which sought approval from the IETF) constitutes an increasingly tiny part of the Internet load these days. The serious pressure comes from applications that never came near the IETF. > like ip addresses (i.e. fixed size small data) would not work so well for > when data served & answer would either come close to or exceed 512bytes > UDP limit. Unproved speculation. As you know, 512 is not a UDP limit it's a DNS implementation limit which was long ago removed by EDNS0 - an IETF standard. The other minor matter is that the Internet is already participating in a billion+ DK signed and verified emails per day - I've been watching, but as yet, no news at 11. At what point do you expect the pressure to be noticed? William. I admire your interest in optimizing DNS load, but, as Knuth might ask, is it premature? If you think not, convince us otherwise. Mark. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf