Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-06.txt

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sat, 02 April 2022 23:29 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 C59423A17E0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.11 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=TE7yh3wf; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=Va2LjFvA
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 SIibuGHrveoN for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:29:53 -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 4BAC83A1399 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 767E6F80278 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 19:29:51 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1648942191; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=/zW5FkeWe1qzJ8tRwY853HdmgJEMShlbqUYI9RVrQ94=; b=TE7yh3wfyiJ73AA/zeZ0Co+gBAnp8cUW3YXOPUO3bv4W1ecnH6kQ2DmuIRvV2J9NZhE7W E0PE5l+R+boMDuODQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1648942191; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=/zW5FkeWe1qzJ8tRwY853HdmgJEMShlbqUYI9RVrQ94=; b=Va2LjFvAcuVR2D/2g1GutFGjohsvUQQb9HRznBqbQqEh1jNTvQJJASHbMh+dBygxR/H62 imYjZNTFZDctDid+fUEMU1RWeHYlDVpv7Tprp4e2WGZ8/Gp3khJVdGXpmqLLR3eQhcN/Hez HyWmHKIBxi1TkHBXpacwnXhzxxaYYEoNGdV9PVPQB1ITagReesRgLKTyXlOOvpnBTHYpxL/ awc6rhIEfoyYrI0GnxvN1pISLJCk3b53HQadAEzx3Qhb6mcEaS7gXk8mNQ0PfmluB8H3rub nOARaNsqxuhYiChQHYrT+5ojEYNihnhxjXoc4o/MP9jvhsvsGpmLc2yKlemA==
Received: from zini-1880.localnet (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431B5F80026 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 19:29:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2022 19:29:50 -0400
Message-ID: <4364250.cxnYrCVWOr@zini-1880>
In-Reply-To: <CAH48Zfzk5WQRx9xy=H42C6FMim+qCoUC4c7uEwGOU8ce0g5mmw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <164789584226.30456.9564261134406099481@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAH48Zfzk5WQRx9xy=H42C6FMim+qCoUC4c7uEwGOU8ce0g5mmw@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/I0VRI5BAE9pfpTau2Rs4dEZcays>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-06.txt
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, 02 Apr 2022 23:29:58 -0000

Before we picked 5, we looked and that's sufficient to capture all the 
boundaries.  It's not a problem.  This was discussed on the list, I don't 
recall when.

Scott K

On Tuesday, March 22, 2022 9:55:56 PM EDT Douglas Foster wrote:
> Suppose a FROM address domain has the lower-bound of 5 segments, and that a
> verified DKIM signature exists using a child domain somewhere below that,
> perhaps with 7 segments.
> 
> Are the names automatically considered to be aligned, without a tree walk,
> because a private registry boundary will not occur below level 5?  Or
> should a scope-limited tree walk be performed between the child domain and
> the FROM domain to be sure that no boundary exists?
> 
> Doug
> 
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 4:50 PM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> > directories.
> > This draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message Authentication,
> > Reporting & Conformance WG of the IETF.
> > 
> >         Title           : Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting,
> > 
> > and Conformance (DMARC)
> > 
> >         Authors         : Todd M. Herr
> >         
> >                           John Levine
> >         
> >         Filename        : draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-06.txt
> >         Pages           : 62
> >         Date            : 2022-03-21
> > 
> > Abstract:
> >    This document describes the Domain-based Message Authentication,
> >    Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) protocol.
> >    
> >    DMARC permits the owner of an email author's domain name to enable
> >    verification of the domain's use, to indicate the Domain Owner's or
> >    Public Suffix Operator's message handling preference regarding failed
> >    verification, and to request reports about use of the domain name.
> >    Mail receiving organizations can use this information when evaluating
> >    handling choices for incoming mail.
> >    
> >    This document obsoletes RFC 7489.
> > 
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis/
> > 
> > There is also an HTML version available at:
> > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-06.html
> > 
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-06
> > 
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org:
> > :internet-drafts
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > dmarc mailing list
> > dmarc@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc