IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] New diff rfc7601 vs rfc7601bis, was Ben Campbell's Discuss...

"Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com> Mon, 14 January 2019 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <kurta@drkurt.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 DD31A1311ED for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 NvorLSsbxWcg for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it1-x12e.google.com (mail-it1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]) (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 C4E6812426E for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id a6so682465itl.4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=R3mUxrQ2iCsMwU4QLUKj91v64Daj8zup6lISLkMgack=; b=ZHaFoi9X1i2v9KGi5hrpglme6/XsqCaRsOlqknv/f1NdpqVkqJXNDKQqglHG5DXi0J GyGaR5vA61+gtpOiNZwFKdGxaFCqtYVpET9DZkPFoQnCQRycwWk/3eG6sAkR8keCbSqY ErTweBtkkyiC9xOlqx5Sv192wUDkggS/iAavw=
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=R3mUxrQ2iCsMwU4QLUKj91v64Daj8zup6lISLkMgack=; b=AcuwMmD4qrCgUGPytnlPS53xFBY2Q6HaAEcgrpyGx6kW6RZfveExsOJ+BmJVjeDw8w HHXzTyYlDGscEIn2E8PWA3/VvWgCDGbBn20pVA8h9mftxUoPuIaxCTzTy7tHzpIZhiq5 ECubhfJIoNuMrCVXCO2rO468UsIFrQmOQbsmjPxyw3LfAS3g0/LDQdNYAOnnFfrVCorQ Sw+uxI/quZKVRC9F1VlWJMt64UQN/UTlMB5Y+O41oDBI7szNIllV++tAbEmOP8TgZDmT C2UKa9lY8zxVmWm7xJehh34XnL2KI372dxQ9C+XtOsF4WpsJECKYHUmO0PyR/YVmz5Xr TeHA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukf7p/ALV3jVhA9/2geSFsESd8RRnfi8Xv7VLw9TcCJ2PxQL2DxC PoknV6OgcrbA9Ryte6ZBju8/eZJLp2ZZnJOm+fhpB+B6+6I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7mEf4q4n0wkcdtF3q/Y87ZLv+ptdi6pg93OFN5LWK0cBjie4Cr+kQ1uCqQApxsr1jYQhnUKEueDlGc2Vx3srY=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:3047:: with SMTP id q68mr271605itq.78.1547489173915; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:13 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <154275534023.29886.12970892679231398383.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwbhjz+SRtjTqVht32z-y8XxzVikvRDo2D=ZZKcoTNiL3w@mail.gmail.com> <2272f6d5-6c80-b80d-4aff-bdcc69449cf8@tana.it> <1927558.aO5YKDjPkr@kitterma-e6430> <CAL0qLwYpExvrBh2tRUoFNRqkUBefqr2S-F5jh6xVR=fyRTjhBg@mail.gmail.com> <CABuGu1qtj6bz81225CjE9kbQfaTA80X18obkb8tvTwZNO8i5fA@mail.gmail.com> <9223F7C0-4412-4123-9DBA-7E0BDC822C32@kitterman.com>
In-Reply-To: <9223F7C0-4412-4123-9DBA-7E0BDC822C32@kitterman.com>
From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:06:02 -0800
Message-ID: <CABuGu1pd=UGc5K6rkdNMnEVYwSO9-+b304PnrzsSAU-CY9BMhQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000816d3c057f6ee670"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/CPI_FEeU1st591HpGjaUt4WE8Lo>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] New diff rfc7601 vs rfc7601bis, was Ben Campbell's Discuss...
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: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:06:17 -0000

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 9:39 AM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On January 14, 2019 3:02:01 PM UTC, "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com>
> wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:16 AM Murray S. Kucherawy
> ><superuser@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:03 AM Scott Kitterman
> ><sklist@kitterman.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> > I see sender-id still has full citizenship.  Now I'm not clear
> >which
> >>> will be
> >>> > first, but my feeling is that rfc7601bis and
> >>> > status-change-change-sender-id-to-historic are going to be
> >published
> >>> more or
> >>> > less at the same time.
> >>> >
> >>> > When a method is moved to historic, are the corresponding
> >parameters in
> >>> the
> >>> > IANA registry moved to deprecated?  If yes, should the move be
> >stated by
> >>> > which document?
> >>>
> >>> A quick look at Domainkeys in the registry and RFC 7601 will answer
> >that
> >>> question for you.  Let's not hold this up.
> >>>
> >>
> >> +1.  This was not identified in IESG Review as something that needs
> >fixing
> >> so I'd just as soon not make more changes now.  If we keep changing
> >it,
> >> it's going to need another cycle through the working group.
> >>
> >
> >I had flagged the lack of deprecating Sender ID in my notes to Murray.
> >Since he did not comment back on that, I had assumed he was good with
> >ripping it all out (or marking it as obsolete).
>
> The registry update policy is expert review.  We won't need another RFC to
> deprecate Sender ID when the time comes.
>

Understood, but I was thinking that cutting Sender ID mostly out of 7601bis
would be appropriate.

--Kurt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email