Re: [dmarc-ietf] Possible draft-ietf-dmarc-psd revision

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Thu, 12 March 2020 08:43 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 16DCE3A135E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
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 hvd4anr39V03 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:43:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADD4D3A135D for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 01:43:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1584002621; bh=LkP9Q28N0ophte2aCVRoxuZL53YjAqYRhaHQZgGRHcw=; l=1381; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=BVoGA4ck4g0a3i2/J1ORnpMxUytyLT0LfEh2gwKsZfY7eROy+HVuKoe847MfSMhHj +oz4/xGOTBT7ekFgVovUYqEkBbb7Blhal1fVuZu1eMAb+oat+ivsU7bQh8ah92LZCW hTINisFaHrm5hnWuDXyiRHPlPjeQAKWrSDot7uJonIxAp0rakeQ94S4j+9Ri3
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.2, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC02F.000000005E69F63D.00005752; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:43:41 +0100
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <4811592.KVNcoShC6a@l5580>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <8f1487b8-3218-39d7-360c-11d1dfea5f43@tana.it>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:43:41 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4811592.KVNcoShC6a@l5580>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/Hv3aPDLov7X9hRwyo3nrl8dp0M4>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Possible draft-ietf-dmarc-psd revision
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, 12 Mar 2020 08:43:46 -0000

On Thu 12/Mar/2020 03:05:15 +0100 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> If the chairs are up for it, I'd like to publish a revision to the draft that 
> fixes the typo mentioned on the list two weeks ago and adds mil to the list of 
> participating PSDs (they have published a record since the last draft update).


Hey, that's true:
ale@pcale:~ dig _dmarc.mil txt
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY; status: NOERROR; id: 15461
;; Flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1; ANSWER: 1; AUTHORITY: 6; ADDITIONAL: 6

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;; _dmarc.mil.         		IN	TXT

;; ANSWER SECTION:
_dmarc.MIL.         	21600	IN	TXT	"v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=none; np=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_reports@mail.mil"

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	pac1.nipr.mil.
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	eur2.nipr.mil.
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	con1.nipr.mil.
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	pac2.nipr.mil.
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	eur1.nipr.mil.
mil.                	172800	IN	NS	con2.nipr.mil.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
con1.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.157.234
con2.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.162.234
eur1.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.154.234
eur2.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.143.234
pac1.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.180.234
pac2.nipr.mil.      	172800	IN	A	199.252.155.234


If they can do it, _dmarc.bank should be publishable as well, shouldn't it?


> I can also explicitly import organizational domain from RFC 7489 as recently 
> discussed.

+1


Best
Ale
--