Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft-ietf-dmarc-psd review

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Fri, 26 July 2019 17:15 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 2DEE4120071 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:15:03 -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=iBaMWW8x; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=hQiAq5oI
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 SWv2LLarf4LZ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:15:01 -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 88BDF120041 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C7ABF80779 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:14:30 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1564161270; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=eW7sg4ohCn2Ddb4hg+gHfhbiP6eLp3c3mkrhk7XSTOk=; b=iBaMWW8xdbU7Wc1k4q5P4JQ4TiIZGKOoAFqxxm+88CUGOTTI/rSKD97W 4t97grh8Uc9XwMtUH1WywCLppdDbAQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1564161270; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=eW7sg4ohCn2Ddb4hg+gHfhbiP6eLp3c3mkrhk7XSTOk=; b=hQiAq5oIS6A0aVTFMt1iFgQMfLKthiyrXhhJ+GrTszFX5acfLTWWLUBw NTVCwWmc79ubTqHWzVmNGxOXS5LR71gaP0fZbDo/bGb5iaed0t/xPI9B3j agunIWfUcYxxAiyaI8NccdeMbD4Jz3Hh5ldaDopq++rAXWrHFxXnkCGeOz SmA72ptIDJT4qDqMytxtIN4w2ncheDISf+jKVX06BM6h83qmzugYN04rBX s01qRIELo36urx4yv1BPZf39l4EHviqEVUj2Ghul+58ZJ/Qz2y379Wy6// kCMK7EgxKwON00hXpzyo3vZREXpFsBk9znL43CsLSk9lEkAt/GQxRw==
Received: from l5580.localnet (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 680C7F80777 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:14:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:14:30 -0400
Message-ID: <1797094.jKfzk300iR@l5580>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwaB7K3ro_=d9bfiLTYnAnNTKSQ3g10USmjADQAoYg4bPg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwaB7K3ro_=d9bfiLTYnAnNTKSQ3g10USmjADQAoYg4bPg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/AmNgppOTY68w9DwgJrHEFROHB7I>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft-ietf-dmarc-psd review
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: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 17:15:03 -0000

On Monday, July 22, 2019 12:23:15 PM EDT Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Reviewing as the document shepherd:

Thanks.  I've been working on document updates based on the last call 
discussion as I have time (xml is in the WG github repo).  I think some of 
these comments will be OBE to those changes, so my plan is to finish LC based 
updates, review your comments, make additional changes as needed, and then ask 
for further discussion/clarification if I'm unsure how to proceed.  I expect to 
have that done today.

Scott K