IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] A tweak to draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

"Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com> Sat, 29 February 2020 20:00 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 62DA23A134B for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:00:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 rGb0pxxKsPQL for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:00:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) (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 835EE3A1349 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:00:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id a6so5891741ilc.4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:00:52 -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=SwVpMym9tXEpEfzIDL5/mF7qh3PFtKwl/BB0K0+Izs4=; b=Gi1hfHHz0hDSCLv1CD13ufsFe+D5pEuoJt4Vw/diXZn7L7zfvgRZvxHsvjgIqAx0to XYMmVVJ7rA6Fudg7esC0lThqtPv1Wz9jS3PH2Tm5SaCuDJZKczmFx+6skURQUMallsTV EVhqj2lTQq5DU4mw0KPZrx5otsa/+D4njumOk=
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=SwVpMym9tXEpEfzIDL5/mF7qh3PFtKwl/BB0K0+Izs4=; b=NX6nZ0wZxUmv5vfmDc+ayyX8T6Wj9c6SCn/O2FfEFblhar7iNF4jzMY/p1kK6qswwx wrL5RMH8Gx3hnzCFn7VHhh0X8RkmF8I0p4jL5tZCcOFWwg0Uill25IErfWCzz0my7PrL FIGYWo/aYXauGojPcodCi0/Q7QNbCj1P5VkUlEKHGVfUqP3NMKv69YUaBUL6gK1yBvUc jRZuufRqnu93xqRFgWhaXpkyIkTpBOX+xmlPfjriVcs92f1J5OQEXvvlFtMedbzvU+xq i0iGnFAe8E/HQ3iyU0ZZznjxVR8Wzq0QvcYJUr1UEXokZxTJ74d1cuQY8+b3ulomWENq VIWg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUZaBvYOY1M7mcNFATYDsrSB9g38b/Tz022F8jINdc3PVXMu5w3 zm84ogYUxCMkm+XIXd0hmGHalctUA3FDYx9w49fQug==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzXLDGNfAmYBa13jOQqbcUBtPrgg1vh0QYWCdA5fOx2sntT0kPEJg6VLjCByhtY1t/JvPTeTcoaY6YaZBAwdAQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:b506:: with SMTP id f6mr10108876ile.103.1583006451615; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 12:00:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL0qLwaU4-74Lq5vYTBMhkj60i+zAbY6JQdOdTVyUoY=pd+QvA@mail.gmail.com> <CADyWQ+Hajp=hX9=8VVJLOJVZ82gLQmOaOJ7BAOhuXtzGi77ogw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+Hajp=hX9=8VVJLOJVZ82gLQmOaOJ7BAOhuXtzGi77ogw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 11:59:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CABuGu1rV6zzuSjdEVbV6cj7AYJoUx2N5uMrL6=ySQAUr8KxWug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000039dba1059fbc696c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/EeS12M5sLJ_jWIQp7vMRrEhqe-Y>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] A tweak to 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: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 20:01:01 -0000

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 11:16 AM Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> If we're going down the road of definitions, RFC8499 defines what a
> "Public suffix" is
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8499#page-28
>
> Which could assist in the Public Suffix Domain definition here.
> If this makes sense, I can offer some suggested text
>

No, that does not help. RFC8499 just refers back to RFC6265 section 5.3
which in turn invokes the PSL - that's Dave's problem with DMARC in the
first place.

I think that Murray's suggestion about importing definitions from DMARC
(RFC7489) makes much more sense than forking elsewhere since this is a riff
on DMARC.

--Kurt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email