Re: [apps-discuss] Pete Resnick's Discuss on draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-05: (with DISCUSS)

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

On 8/4/14 11:22 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Pete Resnick 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>
>     Aha. That wasn't clear to me from the current text. I took "valid"
>     to only be referring to passing the basic DKIM verification
>     algorithms. I didn't realize that not passing local policies was a
>     reason to send back X.7.20. Perhaps you could clarify the text?
>
>
> How's this for a new Section 3.1?

Much clearer. I'll remove my DISCUSS in the morning, unless Barry wants 
me to leave it for housekeeping purposes; I'll assume that you all can 
decide on the specifics. Thanks for DISCUSSing it.

pr

> 3.1.  DKIM Failure Codes
>
>    In the code point definitions below, the term "acceptable" means both
>    of the following:
>
>    a.  The signature passed the basic DKIM verification algorithm as
>        defined in [RFC6376]; and
>
>    b.  The signature satisfied any local policy requirements in addition
>        to the basic algorithm (e.g., certain header fields included in
>        the signed content, no partial signatures, etc.).
>
>       Code:               X.7.20
>       Sample Text:        No valid DKIM signature found
>       Associated basic status code:  550
>       Description:        This status code is returned when a message
>                           did not contain any acceptable DKIM
>                           signatures.  (Note that this violates the
>                           advice of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)
>       Reference:          [this document]; RFC6376
>       Submitter:          M. Kucherawy
>       Change controller:  IESG
>
>
>       Code:               X.7.21
>       Sample Text:        No valid author-matched DKIM signature found
>       Associated basic status code:  550
>       Description:        This status code is returned when a message
>                           did not contain any acceptable DKIM
>                           signatures whose identifier(s) match the
>                           author address(es) found in the From header
>                           field.  (Note that this violates the advice
>                           of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)  This is a
>                           special case of the X.7.20 status code.
>       Reference:          [this document]; RFC6376
>       Submitter:          M. Kucherawy
>       Change controller:  IESG
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>    

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]