Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-10.txt

Dave Crocker <> Mon, 22 February 2021 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEB483A198E for <>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:22:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xC6bC70rRvfc for <>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 695FF3A0BBC for <>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id x20so2263216oie.11 for <>; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:21:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=eQWUOTr2iBlEYRExBbKyJKgHbVNVEngBlLQSUc8i004=; b=XthClWvD5b6GW0Jr91nDErhA3kaIJH7pJ4zd+85cHd7mElDELkAQ/hILnF4oKljlg4 myUE8mDe8rEOcxBN+zQM1PmpjOB1Mg7ZTnt2aVIZ+1kpVtzU2280Y0rrTQPP/UULKYKi TWmHKoIyd5TJNC/bv1qHLNm7Y1zDSie6eD5FnkdEZeS2VpKobSskqkmk/DOU208ByTCj DFDewe8jT64lVZ/nD1m8R340ZvBSMNkx3g2eOeeXJEQUYhqJlphw8BRCy/ZAuqtd2FGu 4msP0Hk7CLiDfhJwgeOY54fEHmQ+GENS/zLUyax9yBym5BOaLpnpQHfV4JwGOUoYgehk vuZw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=eQWUOTr2iBlEYRExBbKyJKgHbVNVEngBlLQSUc8i004=; b=h0TtzuTWI+SfrXyV1FfUNKLMZjLvKFqGnQ0l65LWz60dhdvdI/oURmQ8CgkKxmVxdk KqBJCInaDSuJTbeWhOWfpCVCXDD1yZ2jjYCiScUPAL59ruWaWEF02DRTLF2sfWClm9ak cJJTy5YV0UxdCI4Z0wBsHVIbig72BWRQZo+bIL3Ihvs9VLQh2xgG13KXavoRZnPREMZK Zqx64DjtAQ+WewyTcdnjH7/lVKdUX9l7GbCiBQrVva66aPZS/Tw+ij0U/iM6z0Ye4G+p YXlkM2RiwJDIFmcGRXSpcE/Q6OnPS++bM2jG8yxFwIywFAcg6ylYzQrHcpHH2A6d0eOW XWEw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533y5NGZ7al1eBeU2hl+BtzqQUsxJaG99fbVPX/QQbuOFPSGGnwb /E/Kh29I4trHz88FzmdPoqRxmeS92A5JxA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzjHhZ9inHG/GYY2bGJCEsvoYc+N1Y6m8EOUNBBdhhBTMDoOmKDARkSz0nazE+2gi/dWjBAdw==
X-Received: by 2002:aca:1708:: with SMTP id j8mr15809809oii.29.1614007269533; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:21:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id u81sm2567007oie.46.2021. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:21:09 -0800 (PST)
To: Barry Leiba <>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Dave Crocker <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:21:06 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-10.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 15:22:49 -0000

>>> Actually that's a community that I would expect to know exactly what all those terms mean and
>>> how they are all related.

yes. But it's worse than that.  The current language is not 
automatically clear even for folk with good knowledge about DNS 

As is being noted, I too think a great deal of the problem is 
over-reliance on the word register.

It is being used as if it explains a basic difference in administrative 
roles.  It doesn't.  Not even close.

>> To work with the example you gave here, I agree that "" is registered (under "com"), but
>> disagree that "" is registered at all;
> Right, of course it's not.

I disagree.  Strongly.  The fact that one registration is internal and 
another is through a third-party, semi-regulated service does not make a 
difference, for the use of that word.

I work with an organization that has an IT department that is just as 
formal typical ICANN-authorized registries.  To get a sub-domain is a 
Very Big Deal.  Don't think for a moment that it is fundamentally 
different than interacting with the TLD registeries.

> I didn't say that it is: I said that
> people who don't fully understand this stuff *think* it is, and that's
> the part that the text isn't making clear.
>> To my mind, "register" involves a specific transaction, sometimes involving money, with whoever gates
>> access to make those delegations.

How much do you pay to register to vote?

However the rest of the above statement is correct.  A transaction to 
record gain access to a resource or to reserve access to it.

Registration is a process of signing up.  That's all.  And it says 
nothing about the role or relationship of the entity the registration is 


Dave Crocker

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross