IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alternative draft text for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Wed, 31 May 2017 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.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 D752C12783A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.439
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 EW90OXpUuDGb for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x231.google.com (mail-vk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::231]) (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 62683126D45 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id p85so16055609vkd.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dwjM5NQiVc0eFSeBXivIlg4PUgt/gbe7sMBA8y/hKTE=; b=ZhHFXyLqafdjjOqWii41dgNm1/cZRmpiWgsK0xSJtIpZqFTQTLe03mrR320QZI56DP k/5mcIWj76+TP0/fx1Z4vnsnBesKkaMAr+cHvxKpAQwVBgAZO7kSWUJVFqhy31eDgYI+ DhqkQfPlQSwqcqQ5hgpBzXo7loz/41GpNaEaepRaf0e0NLDe7bUQ4oJSzJBClYibUL0w I/U435uh1YE9AEVlouPH2TLnfNdJX2/plS2B9YaNtWL7tXif3GxXDdrG3wJWU1sa7NQN uIfKxNoXn+2vM6kuwqyFFZarIA6FWt8VMRR/Ia/6Aua2EJHGBzRg00SPEAw7VF0a4/bt R/RQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dwjM5NQiVc0eFSeBXivIlg4PUgt/gbe7sMBA8y/hKTE=; b=nc+3hlJmnqYUjZ27m367r7ttisf0bq98ZKUcz0JBFfqTfFw8Uzf2ezvdhO8+gcjGaT mU5cl90T1s6bo4p/JzBjhMDsWOG3nHkIZPTZeMhzNAnMHVIAm4JClShJohlo5Do/dz+g jvlfm9OHJHZ8NYimDCS1T2d0g0vlZbgyvcDtXn/gWzbZqCHPLeHBDIxcQ9iJsdn3rD+w JZCCncgGx00APIxxtL9fq6M6y9PinIJndAcghQwo0VLdWn4G4D1kIo/Ifsdcb1i8do60 Mc38FSkx1Ec1nFSGh9lHC/+xJcAklzBkrUXNsaTvdQyHr1HLwGmdcb0qNNVzAXQ6mM4l XO/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCc6uFaFSyk95C5ChHJ5D+nOAW8lbajZ3+FgjHeQ52LT8RheCNJ sfIIj23juOmFH1OMw1he3miifRtr4jp6
X-Received: by 10.31.170.2 with SMTP id t2mr13667584vke.100.1496269484581; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.25.69 with HTTP; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOZAAfMAgu5oBgF=z+uQOXCJwh8cxt8rzLRKrYn8mP3W7wA45w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZEeL8ksPK3AwXjty1+RRUgAH=kL1MUOwERGiGxOGd5NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABa8R6vL720q879ks7ELPBH6aXjigntmHQ65hy86T-MQvLJ6+g@mail.gmail.com> <CANtLugMJV9_SOp0tSnjODmo7viiChk5NupVq5+7od_4scQ2iJg@mail.gmail.com> <CABa8R6uzHrgXmCXQ+99nwkMswJnOeYjpb_2CP5JEn_CiYndPdg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOZAAfMAgu5oBgF=z+uQOXCJwh8cxt8rzLRKrYn8mP3W7wA45w@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:24:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwaU+S0f+gmq2TvGxYH2_8hCX+Z02jLzjM3NNDCR7mTbnQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com>
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>, Gene Shuman <gene@valimail.com>, Brandon Long <blong@google.com>, Kurt Andersen <kboth@drkurt.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11430a721de80b0550d963b5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/2zPGGMdxFseAGtkwHIz5-dnyBJQ>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alternative draft text for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 31 May 2017 22:24:47 -0000

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com> wrote:

> Looping back about this.
>
> Currently openarc only supports relaxed canonicalization for the ARC
> Message Signature.
>
> On closer inspection, https://tools.ietf.org/html/dr
> aft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-03#section-5.1.2 and
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protoco
> l-03#section-5.1.2.1.2 do *not* appear to be in direct contradiction of
> each other.
>
> 5.1.2 states that AMS header canonicalization must be relaxed, and
> 5.1.2.1.2 says that AMS body canonicalization must respect the c= value.
>
> Is this what was intended (AMS headers=relaxed, body=[c value]), and
> should be included in the proposed draft? Or should the entire AMS (headers
> and body) respect the c value and both specs be updated?
>

For that matter, why is "c=" required, and why are we constrained to
"relaxed" for headers?

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email