IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Request to accept a new I-D into the WG work items

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Tue, 06 November 2018 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 71D10130DEF for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:17:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
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 iA0RcI40qNmx for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:17:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F80512F1A5 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:17:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=gamma; t=1541531830; bh=UapDPr80B7PxJDhj9+t8GxuMNGrf6mPHuMM0X4KFgDc=; l=1061; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=CvAzK1/aCeMbEzuQv1KwNojtMKymEXhvagHNO6Uj8o3qpSLi26RDkh1up0YDjmtj0 EDkeUfisKXdMoo6nT9esCxHyrOO4ioQ9sL16IyBXoz57gss8BJRfRbKMsOoKr0rDIK iGNNZPXYHz1odvkjZ21+q02wmZ4/7+3zwfIM8E7gjwv7CnVuJ7DbA7TGwLjpH
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPA; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 20:17:10 +0100 id 00000000005DC050.000000005BE1E8B6.00001FF7
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CABuGu1o4E-Svt9N++RaFvO4SATt3Wh1w7gZb1OdBSVRCm7Odmg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVCQmV5agORght0XWr27kDD+OkaEZcKcaDtE8wLG0Yi-YA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Openpgp: id=0A5B4BB141A53F7F55FC8CBCB6ACF44490D17C00
Message-ID: <dee0fd86-40e3-e01d-6c70-2f467759be8b@tana.it>
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 20:17:10 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVCQmV5agORght0XWr27kDD+OkaEZcKcaDtE8wLG0Yi-YA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/81PXEV1p4SNh_gE1mH5qFNdTJkU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Request to accept a new I-D into the WG work items
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, 06 Nov 2018 19:17:16 -0000

On Mon 05/Nov/2018 07:23:08 +0100 Barry Leiba wrote:

>> I'd like to recommend that we (DMARC-WG) accept https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kitterman-dmarc-psd-00
>> into our work queue. It aligns with our charter already.
> 
> I've seen three agreements and no objections, so here's an official
> call for objections.  If there are none by 16 November, we will create
> draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-00 as a new working group item.


Can we have a brief discussion on what exactly is the purpose of the I-D?

At a first glance, it seems an attempt to override the Public Suffix List with
a IANA registry.  The PSL is based on IANA root zones, taking into account PSO
policies.  So, we're requiring PSOs to register their email policies at IANA,
while their web policies will continue to be "registered" at PSL.  Does that
sound somewhat curious or is it me?

BTW, I see
"v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=none;adkim=s;aspf=s;fo=1;rua=mailto:dmarc-rua@dmarc.service.gov.uk;ruf=mailto:dmarc-ruf@dmarc.service.gov.uk",
but neither .bank nor .insurance.

Best
Ale
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email