Re: [dmarc-ietf] ABNF update to dmarc-psd

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 08 June 2021 13:54 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@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 ED6E13A317D for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.097 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, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 c_eFN5sQOm2X for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (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 4AB733A317B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id e11so27071753ljn.13 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Jun 2021 06:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
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=lYwKpnENJhd8Ty6n1MMqClKE73jVJM68wfPrhzFSS9k=; b=Tds4orBMoQnRQH96Tv9ybvKWo1eFUhEqPqFQSpogVWDoX2t87ibfhVHgbN2ixTxXop ObcGTeha8iFx1blPY2RSZhErX1EQDaN4skd9AXyD2tDdSGd9sXPFxKwe930+wQmSOFKR WTFbICBkJiWxayuF+2cPURmGuJzr1cVc9q9sFx3wq2InpfRGv66Fkh+Psu9nhOqDGlOe i5PpEEjZIr2e6Ss+3SqrvzAciLznEOLV9GbBEXck0MC/0kLMj6j5mKrcJjXMrnq5/vPK fUa8Pio8IRCHj8uXDkRfqXPsEgzFNFWUwr1ONTHj3y6hpgJT2vsmHeXoL2JWl/CRLGZO znGg==
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=lYwKpnENJhd8Ty6n1MMqClKE73jVJM68wfPrhzFSS9k=; b=mDfFCoubf08Wmf+eh+PDABri5JnAoP7YdNEnEWxvaFvNhNN3vRgq7n4b9b1mJFi5Lz iFkIH67Fgm8JiNjmWxuZBo8NexYD5VH+k/otytJusLHZo4ruvY7ebJK96Fd41L0EQgPq 7EkbLGchFm3YmglDx5yc1P82wXh54i4V7bB4Pk/h38la/R95d0r7zjA5pIc6zZ0815Hr FKhXeBX4S7Cq0munRFtaXXbMLuN8qjiPccR3ICd+E8voaYbKExsLAjoMS9jehjcYMgLt AHTJoToZvO+Qgfl3yKK1G0SmFR4dXljh+YJetcHfpekxQoCCJokcHbTQy0WUJJka3aDS pySQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532yCjlHuHLeHo+PuY2sFsVzQAjaJMO7Kyd06zbDhVGEJeHppwbQ rjfsDKniDsRwx2mZjBo3NtgnoGeQX+1sSouOJp0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzI4olovda14jVoV3JvF4fh6hNrgVHgqrPM1yzuOHt4pKgEXqHB0YFXzPdeGQ4ZhRrxefnHGOwY7tgCk5uWJwA=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2f14:: with SMTP id v20mr18857195ljv.363.1623160440045; Tue, 08 Jun 2021 06:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADyWQ+FkHUr1DPHpepFU=1_HQi3hOKvSe3bvb4QC+cOqy-OGEg@mail.gmail.com> <b81542f9-b04c-f815-dfab-61e649f578e8@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b81542f9-b04c-f815-dfab-61e649f578e8@gmail.com>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 09:53:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+FOZHKwES4JpfLOt13M7Chimc6B1LfoLuoH-CTEBG+VgQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000071422d05c4417d9c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/B5hDztAJY1jbqT60CvbxJBeVJfA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ABNF update to 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: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 13:54:12 -0000

Dave,

I agree but was scrabbling with the wording. How about


   The "dmarc-record" definition is also updated to include the
   following:

                 [dmarc-sep dmarc-nprequest]

which will go in the next to last line of the definition, as so:

[dmarc-sep dmarc-percent]

[dmarc-sep dmarc-nprequest]

[dmarc-sep]


My first instinct is some sort of diff type output, but that isn't right.

tim


On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 6:26 PM Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/7/2021 3:10 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>                dmarc-nprequest =  "np" *WSP "=" *WSP
>                    ( "none" / "quarantine" / "reject" )
>
> I suggest adding a comment that makes the linkage of 'nprequest' to the
> prose text explicit.
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crockerdcrocker@gmail.com
> 408.329.0791
>
> Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
> Information & Planning Coordinator
> American Red Crossdave.crocker2@redcross.org
>
>