Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Thu, 11 July 2019 05:12 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 F3FAC120048 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 22:12:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=+DB6p7XM; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=qqFFCBUC
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 GUFJTjMfaGe9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 22:12:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B60B81200CE for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 22:12:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3A79F8078C; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 01:12:24 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1562821944; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=4Sgz3OY6ic6CeEPmY32wBtAlyOhCTF8IdX9P4FUpKew=; b=+DB6p7XMGORORRdw7FCIakb13KJobAUJIR3R9lnbRgpsXhSuuIjJ3Uc9 2UxesbdQkZHVbMP5VfzOUZCB2DDzDg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1562821944; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=4Sgz3OY6ic6CeEPmY32wBtAlyOhCTF8IdX9P4FUpKew=; b=qqFFCBUCN3yu5JLcWJPWS7ri6uUqKqG6kJZXrihx/cJBxQrvg1Wx59WG 0GPHiUV+tau3GH+5M8jxwxnuOgTsICeceDikBS4VFmWwjncVkQlzZaRmTE iYuXQ2GLCbRE+r67hhooPcWzLu2IpM9tVsH0H3EDOEFYxbYnBFh0xS9nkL oRPPSrdEx5VhSQe1GiTxd5xccN10V0O25vxU1AKc/v00ITtaIxzTlEWWxh FWTcY+deq+mGPElyhvybUaWoKOUdhzgm0oa4Nyc0/vjlz9hOeDZWYDwLC+ ifhWVHIvux9G5Hx1iZI01Gd9oHMtMGg6xR7e9cNiEOTQdjBkMJDIYw==
Received: from [192.168.1.184] (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F602F8004E; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 01:12:24 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 04:07:56 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CABuGu1qt12HF=mQQa_S4SHC14VbAau=kER2F3AzJqHpPauDcLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwbbz_UhBLsURg=eXhRBC2g9OghiN==T9Uq9pFuLtd=b7w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOZAAfN0+nxpN1P_nk3y5f8MTQ=c7DYNvYic2iDMuCK_bNa=qg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOZAAfM9BPLz6UR1bLTrE30dsWLv3k=UNNbGDGCrAfT7Op7FGg@mail.gmail.com> <CABuGu1qt12HF=mQQa_S4SHC14VbAau=kER2F3AzJqHpPauDcLg@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: <78C64421-261E-4E17-9996-5AD8CBDB0348@kitterman.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/8bzCjfVPTj5nLZYvc1zlVV7olaE>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
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: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 05:12:30 -0000
I don't plan any changes except for those in response to last call comments. Unless I get direction otherwise, I don't plan any updates until after last call is over. Please review this one. Scott K On July 10, 2019 11:10:25 PM UTC, "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com> wrote: >I, for one, would *really* like to see the rumored "next version" from >Scott and prefer to comment on that one, rather than an at-best >penultimate >version. > >--Kurt > >On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:21 PM Seth Blank <seth= >40valimail.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> There is one week left before WGLC closes, and the below three items >still >> need resolution. Please speak up! >> >> -- Seth, as Secretary >> >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:21 PM Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com> wrote: >> >>> As Secretary, there are three items that have not yet reached >consensus >>> that must be resolved during WGLC: >>> >>> 1. What further context is needed in the introduction >>> 2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to >implement >>> are needed >>> 3. If an np= tag is needed to allow PSD functioning for only >NXDOMAINs >>> >>> Seth >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:08 PM Murray S. Kucherawy ><superuser@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This message begins Working Group Last Call for >draft-ietf-dmarc-psd, >>>> which is currently at version 04. An 05 may appear shortly with >some text >>>> changes that were previously discussed on the list; these do not >include >>>> any technical changes (I believe) so the author is free to update >with only >>>> those changes as planned. >>>> >>>> Please review the document and submit your feedback by Wednesday, >July >>>> 17th. We would ideally like to have enough responses to support >our claim >>>> to the IESG that the document clearly has working group consensus. >>>> >>>> Note that we will be in pre-meeting draft embargo at that time so a >new >>>> version dealing with any feeback cannot appear until IETF 105 >begins on the >>>> 22nd. >>>> >>>> I'm planning to do my own review as the document shepherd with an >eye >>>> toward consumption by readers with only a passing familiarity with >DMARC. >>>> If anyone wants to join me in looking at it through that lens, >you'd be >>>> welcome. >>>> >>>> -MSK, co-chairin' >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> dmarc mailing list >>>> dmarc@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >> >> *Seth Blank* | Director, Industry Initiatives >> *e:* seth@valimail.com >> *p:* 415.273.8818 >> >> >> >> This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential >> >> and/or proprietary information intended solely for the use of >> >> individual(s) authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended >> >> and authorized recipient you are hereby notified of any use, >> >> disclosure, copying or distribution of the information included in >> >> this transmission is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please >> >> immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and then >> >> delete it from your system. >> _______________________________________________ >> dmarc mailing list >> dmarc@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >>
- [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Scott Kitterman
- [dmarc-ietf] Introduction context was: Re: Workin… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Introduction context was: Re: Wo… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Introduction context was: Re: Wo… Scott Kitterman
- [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limitation… Scott Kitterman
- [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: W… Scott Kitterman
- [dmarc-ietf] Implemnetations was: Re: Working Gro… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Hollenbeck, Scott
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Introduction context was: Re: Wo… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limita… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Ian Levy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Richard C
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Chudow, Eric B CIV NSA DSAW (USA)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Ian Levy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-i… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Chudow, Eric B CIV NSA DSAW (USA)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Ian Levy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Ian Levy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: R… Kurt Andersen