Re: Generic records and DKIM

Harm van Tilborg wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> 
> Please check how large the exact response is. Does it increase the 
> 512-byte 'border'?
> 

Yes I believe it does, when I redirect the result to disk it is 744 
bytes. If that is a close enough method to get size of the response. 
That leads me to why I tried to use generic records instead of text 
records, but generic records do not seem to to work as the string length 
bytes is not set in the response according to John L.

Oddly, John L's text record is not broken when I use dig to check it, 
and his response size is nearly the same as mine. I am beginning to 
think there is a patch I need for tinydns/dnscache that I am unaware of 
and everyone else is using.

DAve

-- 
"Posterity, you will know how much it cost the present generation to
preserve your freedom.  I hope you will make good use of it.  If you
do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to
preserve it." John Quincy Adams

http://appleseedinfo.org