Re: [dbound] The proposals before us

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Thu, 01 September 2016 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B58012D9C0 for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 07:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=verisign-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 ZiGWXkCTo9NL for <dbound@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 07:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x261.google.com (mail-qt0-x261.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::261]) (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 8826312D581 for <dbound@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 07:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x261.google.com with SMTP id 11so4786443qtc.2 for <dbound@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 07:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=verisign-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id :references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language :mime-version; bh=tjMRQqfn29R7ENsqcbhQ0Qg7xe9dxTSxtlC9l014JFM=; b=JyhxXlq0V3lWtRSa2gK+V9cRv6hWJUaLdTVtO8ArjzT/TskkLO+EZriXGptceYdYtg 21ls8MvnEhHsO6okdRiu8Hd2qTSlvdY1e4Wyb0PiT6rvazdNhh28z8fZEGqGnZagc8zM mKMtwSzAFsZJ+cPVVxn3FU8VtNB1U2xDFw3NmS2XEGmQAu4zyPU/HHJYMy+MJtip6zIe z4phwhPnqDAn/4Y8PzeFLUp2ZyRxyGfiD++2Y+KPTVoHV4Ue/UaJITBDCtv7NZBBA0h4 ntD9/3W/SUEyxdDmg2X6V9KfDIXEfYCHv9y4Z9JCZfCSpDHJyl3Ac3Jp/ejNfQMJ5Q3b TTGA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date :message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language :mime-version; bh=tjMRQqfn29R7ENsqcbhQ0Qg7xe9dxTSxtlC9l014JFM=; b=HAvK1NztwA6SqC1P4DFGlfI1WX/YzOM3fJfv1EYIi1wRP4WlLsIJYQ/dai69iOCXnY QNwTAGUDBn3hs98RD9Fmi3yzNDFHfjL/e+uSOWKE/dSG2+X+FiJzAesC+MdjFaevBAmy EC6gTJUhW+BlLNiH4BlsGe4i4VjIVQBX2/CKTuthDkVQktUACyI39b/A76rA92/wK0Kp e1N/91GF/m5jz7SK3bYWwzvWyRQFZchyVSgrbdC456AFHRwnEpERteyaf74iz+OOv0Uz XOmG8n4GSmqPkOMqG5bDAA8r5v/yDSujW8VYPQOVK1ASsPSw+uADuLE4z5mejxgs7SDW /Uig==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwNhyqbLWg76kbuvhlvkKJ+Y5L6LW64zE6fRUjVF4I6HVf/JAa7/qxJxwgqG3Kbhcbe4Wjo+k1JIGC/DYM24MPKU8aCT
X-Received: by 10.55.129.1 with SMTP id c1mr17388423qkd.53.1472741007298; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 07:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com (brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com. [72.13.63.42]) by smtp-relay.gmail.com with ESMTPS id q72sm908171qka.4.2016.09.01.07.43.26 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Sep 2016 07:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Relaying-Domain: verisign.com
Received: from BRN1WNEXCHM01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexchm01 [10.173.152.255]) by brn1lxmailout02.verisign.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u81EhQUU024955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:43:26 -0400
Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by BRN1WNEXCHM01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:43:26 -0400
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, "dbound@ietf.org" <dbound@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [dbound] The proposals before us
Thread-Index: AQHSAtnatmsQEHcT00mdHkRUb8L0BaBktpyw
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:43:25 +0000
Message-ID: <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A46D882@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
References: <CAL0qLwYQcNLk7=4=W=vcVwLcMA8JSaKYAKoNGsKP6yQ13qD=Yg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYQcNLk7=4=W=vcVwLcMA8JSaKYAKoNGsKP6yQ13qD=Yg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A46D882BRN1WNEXMBX01vc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dbound/bfrZczfl3TDXynhom9VWOqNkSgU>
Subject: Re: [dbound] The proposals before us
X-BeenThere: dbound@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS tree bounds <dbound.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dbound/>
List-Post: <mailto:dbound@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dbound>, <mailto:dbound-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 14:43:31 -0000

From: dbound [mailto:dbound-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 11:57 AM
To: dbound@ietf.org
Subject: [dbound] The proposals before us

OK, let's get going.  It's time to make progress or die.
The proposals before us:
* ODUP (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-deccio-dbound-organizational-domain-policy/)
* John Levine's proposal (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dbound-dns/)
* SOPA (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-domain-policy-authority/)
Given that we are now constraining ourselves to dealing with the email case only, do we have a clear preference for one of these to adopt and develop?  As I recall, we (especially the authors) all had homework to review these under this new scope constraint and provide critical feedback with a goal of making a selection of some kind for the working group to develop.  Does anyone have such comments to get us moving here?
My team has implemented a proof of concept of ODUP and tested it with some hacking in Firefox and Postfix. It seems to work just fine.

Scott