Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Wed, 17 July 2019 05:07 UTC

Return-Path: <sklist@kitterman.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C578E120114 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.99
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b=a4o7iZq7; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=WZlmf3qy
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 aV2ntOx8Y82q for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CB22120058 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0F72F805B5 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 01:07:11 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1563340031; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=9B9eR6CHfnJZzlfm76UCIKZa8DwVCT2SsmIi5K2c3bc=; b=a4o7iZq7zhQ8kHUS6tgv6lkbdvDx/3jcd3bGq8Frc2v0gdsUNRwceGP8 IoNY4v3BhbFX4fPK/RJikWM8otGZAg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1563340031; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=9B9eR6CHfnJZzlfm76UCIKZa8DwVCT2SsmIi5K2c3bc=; b=WZlmf3qyCnDZ+mhV8F3WpGx+TJL/w/FXosg2Mt+S/X/QBKEUaU0a7MqY MkzmCZ6vKGHCBtL98EMfHieK0iUuIc3yiLG9PyyrOe5b0iABJ9VHibmcAy tFQkQQeXAeIVMG5jRwPTNTHQNbOfrGfSwjEm+lkJl3aAxu0XOoKma30Nw7 cxVsI5OyfLKLdLrAUcEUaDviyMmUNoXJ4dGvK/qWVpOBwLQuIfG+kdiBl3 LBol4yMPvNGQ+t/rin0saBc+fFVRSboiVaqpwC27QKFToK3RLvSX/2WXD1 OUI7LFZUsHh+QMewcl4C9S9omHT96isVNrTt6dwjdJIFGKIcuoB4IQ==
Received: from l5580.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2600:380:4a72:99c3:ca:14c:24f3:8d22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 254F3F8008C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 01:07:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 01:07:05 -0400
Message-ID: <7295017.bxVsTnSgkA@l5580>
In-Reply-To: <4789054.Ip9ilXyiH0@l5580>
References: <CAL0qLwbbz_UhBLsURg=eXhRBC2g9OghiN==T9Uq9pFuLtd=b7w@mail.gmail.com> <1958020.28HeBAo97T@l5580> <4789054.Ip9ilXyiH0@l5580>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="nextPart10805324.Ar2neLQE0L"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/0Zqiozm36PotIt7PQ1oZef3RxBA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 05:07:15 -0000

On Saturday, July 13, 2019 3:34:51 PM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, July 12, 2019 2:28:39 PM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Friday, July 12, 2019 1:54:57 PM EDT Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 10:50 AM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>;
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 5:21:14 PM EDT Seth Blank wrote:
> > > > > 3. If an np= tag is needed to allow PSD functioning for only
> > > > > NXDOMAINs
> > > > 
> > > > The limited feedback during WGLC has been favorable to this.
> > > > 
> > > > This will require a rather larger change to the document than the
> > > > other
> > > > issues, but they are manageable and I believe I have most of the
> > > > relevant
> > > > text
> > > > from earlier revisions.
> > > > 
> > > > I think we should include this.
> > > 
> > > I am much more concerned with adding another tag that can only be used
> > > in
> > > a
> > > PSD-DMARC record. I would be much more open to make a "normative" change
> > > to
> > > the DMARC tag list (RFC 7489 section 11.4) to define np for any DMARC
> > > record, than to make this a special case for PSD-DMARC records.
> > 
> > I agree.  My intent is to add the tag to be used experimentally for any
> > DMARC record.  Part of the experiment is to see if it's useful beyond PSD.
> 
> Attached is my proposed text to add the np tag.  Based on the discussion to
> date, I assume I'll be asked to add something like this after last call is
> complete, so please let me know how to make it better.
> 
> Scott K

Updated rfcdiff attached.  The only change other than typos is to add mention 
of 'np' to Appendix A.

Scott K