IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dmarc-ietf] Re: What do do with ARC, Re: Discussion Thread

Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com> Sat, 26 October 2024 17:36 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@highwayman.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 B5319C14F69C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:36:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=highwayman.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EOAKmRGUlQyw for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.highwayman.com (mail.highwayman.com [82.69.6.249]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41766C14F699 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:36:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=highwayman.com; s=rnc1; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From: To:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Lgr9ZQS+TwQ+Ez1srrC3Jyh8sMslEnlHHzKY6sLU7Lk=; t=1729964184; x=1730828184; b=eRE5GVyeE6gAenNJdYjsNRxgx5iBfDN1IKoJEARtzJIKQ2gEJ85SzZQTzb4YFvoH10OjkQTdslc tRaPtEy4C0cWOgnerOCF8ZYCLH8RrIoWR49T2IdEsvfufsKBv0IotadJdq30zdYEUHJAXws4fgxO7 rhY3PCO085jnrshb8mxRFUGYxoeSfL73RpxbjUi8qfbvcO82K0S9NHnU/AUiTYRK/jqUDWYGyyz0n MwnAGdZiTagicr86+0Q//i/B3Lm2ztga3Lynk0TN61nqqsm8RaKfK2v6f9ZiSgZi93Uk9z/b/KnuG 4SamhsgQyOufDfPoh9npGvQ6RSh5xcrDijZg==;
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (port=19430 helo=happyday.al.cl.cam.ac.uk) by mail.highwayman.com with esmtp (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from <richard@highwayman.com>) id 1t4ki6-000000005GL-1wDl for dmarc@ietf.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 17:36:22 +0000
Message-ID: <RjYH+xcRhSHnFAu7@highwayman.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 18:35:13 +0100
To: dmarc@ietf.org
From: Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com>
References: <CAHej_8=Gs0XURT4UVrKxxfc45BtVDmPRgGT9rvxDHBbzbd-0bw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwY0PjxkTAkSEwB_s6KgAODFAB8z665wKY-pLJ16UT8oXA@mail.gmail.com> <21B7963C-1CBC-4017-98D7-77749FDA6B3E@bluepopcorn.net> <CAL0qLwYqrf=G2ws1e05EUS2JSaU=KyhcXF8OUJ5aXV4nvKXVFA@mail.gmail.com> <bbfe0737-b8af-412c-9d98-a31c29b8c175@crash.com> <CAL0qLwYqMyUtFcmTFs8HOwjPnt_0VN2UxpuwXbYwpOc5JgtfgQ@mail.gmail.com> <20241024221344.26C84A326945@ary.qy> <df9b2e0f-f7cb-4346-a2d0-0f55be92e8f2@tana.it> <084985fb-5bcd-1acf-e73c-358690f49f3a@taugh.com> <ef05185f-71ef-451d-87ec-ec0943b5fe72@tana.it> <43f5078a-0873-d22a-b529-8112de51c7ca@taugh.com> <3c6cb525-b0c0-4fed-9207-bb1b841fde9b@tana.it> <CAL0qLwbitDNYra61SFR=-hJuMDvm9WwLLc_NKhDLOTEV9UcgrQ@mail.gmail.com> <ea436117-f93a-dc99-394d-e2f4eae09a02@taugh.com>
In-Reply-To: <ea436117-f93a-dc99-394d-e2f4eae09a02@taugh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.03 M <vV2$+DSn77v5MMKLymW+duaIWj>
Message-ID-Hash: KXMG76RWQUBIQYET4D5WCZHGULQQJMHR
X-Message-ID-Hash: KXMG76RWQUBIQYET4D5WCZHGULQQJMHR
X-MailFrom: richard@highwayman.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dmarc.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: What do do with ARC, Re: Discussion Thread
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/6_Aj2c3ULFMknGa3jZ5OV469t9Y>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dmarc-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dmarc-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dmarc-leave@ietf.org>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In message <ea436117-f93a-dc99-394d-e2f4eae09a02@taugh.com>, John R
Levine <johnl@taugh.com> writes

>On Fri, 25 Oct 2024, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> If we agree that ARC is stable and valuable enough to move to the standards
>> track, as Tero suggested, then that can be the WG's next order of business,
>> but please don't let that debate slow down the main document's progress.
>
>I don't think it is.  The same people who invented ARC are now working on 
>DKIM2, using what we learned about ARC, and I expect that once DKIM2 is 
>implemented we'll all forget about ARC.
>
>Since ARC is an IETF experiment, once DKIM2 is further along and it's 
>clearer what it does differently from ARC, it's worth a short followup to 
>8617 to say what we learned.

One of the aims of DKIM2 is to make ARC unnecessary, and in particular
to ensure that cases where an intermediate system must be trusted relate
only to improving your heuristics which detect DKIM-replay or where you
have a contractual relationship with that intermediary.

- -- 
richard                                                   Richard Clayton

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary 
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBZx0oUd2nQQHFxEViEQLptgCffkZavOw/B/RrAy+8bru3wU046V8An1XU
jpWBtSusp28C/es7P88f6IP4
=BpSK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status