Re: [apps-discuss] The authentication server id, was rfc5451bis

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 27 March 2013 19:47 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8A121F9007 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -111.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nChheXVnZxc0 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:47:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D4D21F9005 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 8519 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2013 19:47:21 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 27 Mar 2013 19:47:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=51534cc8.xn--30v786c.k1303; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=Uq3tEfWnjoPwyoWX/l8Xy1VDUzz9PNadkZxoEVq7GrM=; b=FM28EyduNyGrbBqFK3kc0hYPRJnX2pFpzwwo7yMSn5de4pVIr7+9fO0dyL5Fadq8BuGkje5/kjIMsivPHByyoNVcuZ120dYo6v8skY9+VPOOVrTVnP5JsX8i/Vpme59jPpDveSZcypxYBqhtA/FAgGxji8/wrz9ApZe73/itmIo=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=51534cc8.xn--30v786c.k1303; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=Uq3tEfWnjoPwyoWX/l8Xy1VDUzz9PNadkZxoEVq7GrM=; b=gmcKpYysJdhR9IP1PiYb0/5muUSe6PdTH+5/tOybjbeTa0ZscKGZ3m5xagUmq8yHIf8T4vX3GMWYk0f6YqCPV88qkSvbub35JQsyZRq9vM4KdnmpVWF0uokyNIoIwxW0RQn3W94NV1f4G+I5ryNJS6htmBi6yuW1djFEltMkDFQ=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: 27 Mar 2013 19:46:58 -0000
Message-ID: <20130327194658.42435.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <5152E2DB.4030807@tana.it>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: vesely@tana.it
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] The authentication server id, was rfc5451bis
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 19:47:23 -0000

>Ok, that is starting to make some sense.  Maybe it's me, but reading
>RFC 5451 as well as its bis I had the false impression that the spec
>not only allows but even encourages such practice.  I'll try and
>suggest an alternative text at the bottom.

As far as I'm aware, nobody else has read it that way.  When I read
the text, it's clear that it's a stable identifier to let systems
recognize their own A-R headers.

>NEW
> For security reasons, any MTA conforming to this specification MUST
> remove or rename

Definitely not.

R's,
John