Re: [dmarc-ietf] AD review of draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03.txt

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sat, 03 November 2018 04:44 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 60F69130E0E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 21:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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] 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=6BnNw5Sn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=pFSoIZ4I
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 QTRQUO2Xmj2e for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 21:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout03.controlledmail.com (mailout03.controlledmail.com [IPv6:2607:f0d0:3001:aa::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E2D8130E06 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 21:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201803e; t=1541220270; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : date : subject : from; bh=56m0J7Ypg3/O/qk/40ijLGbgEZ6qev/Lsd4LxB91B0I=; b=6BnNw5Snkrcn27pCS77lsSRSG/8Ny1uKQsuhqxJWyNzHtwG4QZWJ19Cs KhbMpq7Ug1zofOmZd4yc3o1CIWEsCg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201803r; t=1541220270; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : date : subject : from; bh=56m0J7Ypg3/O/qk/40ijLGbgEZ6qev/Lsd4LxB91B0I=; b=pFSoIZ4Il7OAM3wfztyUuPZkd8Fq4Jk/umljbYMawRNEsv2ZVz1bAY8t ZDiRjStSWJSWKsxUitPVqYOGTjSEasmr3MI9m7WM3x0p9Lqf0Ggz7JcxKA 9stiYHPo8KhpFPscQd/uRzueepLXM1lKif1l7SoMIpfU+j4fZC84qGvyup +ckDR+PeqaAZgeph0dsWrUbp+9Hy5FcRYlDispn3wLfTLstD0+8044lbXq /xyXwSevHKylfChs9596A4NEmbx/diWTczSvGj9MeWq+hwXfU8RYztVErC AGr16oEwShczuAxPzmo9zB6JFU6tNEBjLhvVYzeaDW3UPFaxD7Mo5g==
Received: from [192.168.1.146] (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout03.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0BAEAC40229; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 23:44:30 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2018 04:44:22 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYz7FKYjn-7CAe8xN_fZ9HFRnNCPWTq=uU6VhG6xHLdOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3eea2f77-8aea-4f49-80f3-d96b639c378a@isode.com> <CAL0qLwZjLzUdWH+sz=TifJEF-zQVevUHug=um9+6dUvU_5f4dA@mail.gmail.com> <4E1476B7-C994-43C4-9449-55B9771E5C84@kitterman.com> <CAL0qLwYz7FKYjn-7CAe8xN_fZ9HFRnNCPWTq=uU6VhG6xHLdOA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: dmarc@ietf.org
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Message-ID: <86668460-6C5A-4641-88ED-2CDC815FA9DE@kitterman.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/6U9P3GS102ShAPwkRmaw-Vcw-Z0>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] AD review of draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03.txt
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: Sat, 03 Nov 2018 04:44:36 -0000


On November 3, 2018 4:24:31 AM UTC, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>; wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 12:44 PM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>;
>wrote:
>
>> >Sorry, what's being deleted?  RFC7601bis doesn't (shouldn't!) be
>> >deleting
>> >anything; it adds a couple of entries and makes itself authoritative
>> >for
>> >the registration of the header field, but otherwise nothing is
>> >changing.  I
>> >thought that was pretty explicit.
>>
>> What should the reference be in the registry for the existing
>entries?
>> RFC7601 will be historic, so that hardly seems right and they aren't
>listed
>> in 7601bis so that doesn't work either.
>>
>
>I think your questions (to which I haven't replied just yet) are quite
>different than Alexey's statement that something has been "deleted".  I
>was
>trying to resolve that.

Okay.  I had a different interpretation of his comments.

Scott K