IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-08

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 19 January 2021 23:23 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 7ADBC3A1877 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 akxjCI-fzYtK for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2d]) (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 40AFA3A171A for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com with SMTP id o125so10794356vsc.6 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eFI6/5988+8xUlznKKyLSLckBuFQVBmEznAdHfsjTEs=; b=TNgz1jyEgxcTMj7NjtrWsmwqRkIarYIYBKi49Vz593SVQb38SNNTkWLfKq5jqtwjEh Gk8Vd4DeLCK6TpVKfkIU85LvOY8JkFWCMUwHCIELEoFASVlEKS0TljvebNGcdiSak9VT 0y6KaTl5oeGWCwE1QGA3L4GPVO75fRkeD07PWCxj2zJTr1baKOtx7WYNlEnE9iu5sZi1 YSQVL06JXmt29WnIYb+jY7udJbRNCoWG64Lm/oqZgMz682UQC8tJE7vWJlhgRC3BU1lm F/eh2WBxE5Ka4OtdkQ1NUbdiUOCkBhBZbSMUK4hj+c19y2Y/uGxF4+vM0A7UjOh6p5ql uZwA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eFI6/5988+8xUlznKKyLSLckBuFQVBmEznAdHfsjTEs=; b=bCTrxTInZYPYWgzvsWumRPdBiknhYpHmp4oXjphiNsQLS/la69dipN1gYQeyPiYzaw GM4GTkpWLTmbsBQtfZWnG/Tlyld4b/+/hA3oCf4FxgD5Kl3+P2zPRqrNrFxhzJ5E0tzl G8X2nBXoNnnOSTG8901ydFkJKmAUotTLwVQ/Kk3TMA9ZkS6l/vQHPRKsXHbvKqqoSpWs DnczegpGY06v5loZYWYMXNlg6KVFcO+hWuQtPIXk1x54VrwUSKDog9iqGV+byGt78DKE 3ohP6/lAEfpt494v3pOaYNTsh4xYD4Tc2vd8IiUsNMhzmXj1rZsq8n5LNlZCYOkrc/x9 iuPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532o1SPgENTdWMsxlyAj9OInTF4stipn40aFaBO+RGconjBkg+jC CtIoErx75uFBHJQfrzQYLSy2joZoMr7fFeZw5OU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyMYg4dVLYUy85ZRVv7GoJOkmxwVfmhoNS/7azt7MUUn1i2Q1Jr/FSns7K40LuNHIvX0Hr6W8z/ocMhhk+jUwQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:2bc2:: with SMTP id r185mr4556510vsr.15.1611098632217; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADyWQ+Fb93SkiAnL4cuCfxC5Wi1ERLeKhguWqAp3j8YEa6JBSA@mail.gmail.com> <87ima4wu3s.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> <CAL0qLwbiOrgsEjZU_V6W8e42SRNoUh7CzyngRMR5RLeQpzrxaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48ZfwOdZcJz02a76wktQDpV_dpPHKw+qJjE2ZCDvOqF3Ptdw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwZf+tEGZj0T6UmaNBSMC-nqSpfb5DAFh8+GDuP6F5pRkQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48ZfxJBwROXjtTr0YCOtBN0h_Q=jU559fAnUUNRpFjvEinRA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH48ZfxJBwROXjtTr0YCOtBN0h_Q=jU559fAnUUNRpFjvEinRA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:23:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwYhjRx0nomXe_3KcKXTAmONce4bw6K6YLnNRLZJCzoYBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000abe97c05b94921aa"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/8-b9PgxobllZ6ZYLyiFMOXNJikM>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-08
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: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 23:23:55 -0000

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 2:11 PM Douglas Foster <
dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com> wrote:

> No Murray, I was speaking to the PSD document.
>
> PSD's entire purpose is to detect abuse of non-existent organizational
> domains, so the definition of non-existent is crucial to its success.    I
> believe the current language will produce false positives, albeit probably
> a small number.    The current language is also more resource-intensive
> than mine, although that is not my concern.
>

What I mean is: If we say PSD experiment participants evaluate the notion
of "non-existent" differently than vanilla DMARC implementations, we have
to account for that when interpreting the results of the experiment.  But
the experiment as crafted is just to determine if the PSD algorithm as
proposed is a useful improvement.  It seems to me that changing the nature
of that test at the same time is scope creep that muddies the waters.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email