IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Bimi] draft-bkl-bimi-overview-00

"Kurt Andersen (IETF)" <kurta+ietf@drkurt.com> Thu, 14 March 2019 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <kurta@drkurt.com>
X-Original-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D05D8130EF1 for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pPm-7-fngaaB for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it1-x136.google.com (mail-it1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E29B130EE3 for <bimi@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it1-x136.google.com with SMTP id o76so3880104ita.3 for <bimi@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:cc; bh=9d9BotTR7QCVzgjuEfyx3kPAZDPF5TIdFvZe4zDgKBg=; b=Lb8IlgdcQi7kk/yYq2N/N0W2L+W6LiRYuYMRuDgMxgmYZdiNzgBiAZuleEOeIf9pIw C45C77WYEXmqrKflKI0sy+DWmJGisAKgpR6yIHJkxJ1LeF6QU5ud/F+kj9MYlz2M7ZiA t8h1jASJj4+NZl9wBHLX+GlMeYl3Oj0lEbV7E=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:cc; bh=9d9BotTR7QCVzgjuEfyx3kPAZDPF5TIdFvZe4zDgKBg=; b=ffQRi61FIcEUqnfvC+aYpEmsSw8LPkxuEBeXsbF5iAoWixy/9jq1MHIeoc1TA52ACq 1+9AIjXMx4GcvtfJiOeq2SdxhXgFe1wjg6h99qFZeZS57yQzYi5VX/Os2rQcIALs/Q46 RtDqsWO0whSvDWr314JVT9FMPDBsqH6Mofqxhjq7dUqte+z0TksBJ/eFFGQrFHYCDyuG 8XKwwUXRpuZ8ms8b5qFT4Wmc5+Z0rAXJF3rCgz6tupuBm8AKyp6tFQ9jKh4Cz6sH/sLd 86ECGX0e89rwhlwjBX0MIJlVoU93Lf6nAoUxqk/HqubJgED49J7xPINXFcMdSbc8ZfGR KXNw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXmMXPMjdalYrfoAyyfw8+AyG0hTdvspczYeaWP7PN7yNaFg+Xj fEvPu4YgIF5wjX5D4C9bYLRWmSqJZn8eG6PBlqair7KrsMw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwHFDWeEKghwKt5kRA3+j6vOCl4dW6Zh3H6/sixwFEN2sOJD5PXdSrRepRN6+w1ItwbBgqVWuJ0Mk5nWsW9E0w=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:b143:: with SMTP id c3mr361129itj.79.1552597594115; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <155229406950.16918.2163707322967420687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAOZAAfNe-t_OBevjMh6oZ=9XA4T2H8yRWLW3f3Fd+F40KiEh=A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOZAAfNe-t_OBevjMh6oZ=9XA4T2H8yRWLW3f3Fd+F40KiEh=A@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Kurt Andersen (IETF)" <kurta+ietf@drkurt.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:05:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CABuGu1pAtg=PDpDU2A9wvz1RkjWrGfDz4spLx_o6tBCkn1VyMg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: bimi@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000013a5a90584144c20"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bimi/HXSSHrQLe0gcGnDaxU3LPw2KyOY>
Subject: Re: [Bimi] draft-bkl-bimi-overview-00
X-BeenThere: bimi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Brand Indicators for Message Identification <bimi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bimi/>
List-Post: <mailto:bimi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 21:06:37 -0000

A couple of minor comments while awaiting a more thorough discussion in the
IETF104 BoF:

In section 3, the opening sentence refers to benefits for senders and
recipients. I think it should also identify that there are potential
benefits to receivers and operators of MUAs too.

In section 3.1, there is a reference to "changes the secret handshake". I
think that the point of having a public standard is that the crucial change
is to make is a non-secret handshake. I appreciate that this is qualified
with "if implemented poorly", but that should perhaps be changed to "if
specified poorly (or obscurely)".

--Kurt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email