Re: [dmarc-ietf] Extensions in Aggregate Reporting - Feedback Requested

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 14 June 2021 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 4C7A13A07DC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=TZjNlzIL; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=A29EgKAn
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 d29DzJA6Jgvv for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:50:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 AEA863A07D4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:50:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 58695 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2021 19:50:56 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=e543.60c7b320.k2106; bh=4I8WWVUj6DvL5Pd8vYJbosuhrLf2WFJQLb6NqN7NNz8=; b=TZjNlzILxGUamTbfr781zJC3MuP/nXMQfZ+T+RnO24xgKjZ9Lyih4MkecoNXnOXOMz9aMHUdU9mmCYP4uLGaZ63vqXtwAG9CSepikNL3b957akIQ9LyxkczmWA/hoa5FuWl6Dfmew0G2sUwvpqaZaqsCwRJk2/Yud98tfDJG4Y/KIh1oqpOOqygEwZx3HqysAZL+FimjpEfrKp0zlCyiCKcIzg/PJKKZO97iXATYWAV5w73D7umHFi5gS0gsaJDGE+2sSNbg8NROZI5gCgU6+PtvrPYOZXsZgN8tyeNyQscxC6HD2JOuT7TjEtDCkZPlu2oUMkq935bLn3YnnfOM/w==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=e543.60c7b320.k2106; bh=4I8WWVUj6DvL5Pd8vYJbosuhrLf2WFJQLb6NqN7NNz8=; b=A29EgKAnueILL83BJkDQzk0XNFMcK9pwgnCrctiuSn8r0Pf2hlf3eKQsUG1OT6o1bkSAxSWLTZ9EJtj3E6L3qbV9t21Xon37qxcLOEQmUq6DH4TSrmN/jfiQKeDp0CN4SNI8/taXzzRWh3Oh9q49UQeW3kaMCYKbVW0UqxcH02tTtENMYNvnu6zTje9DyR/6kw27umrwUNsyEb1BKuMgXszmZNeCwAEGbOpQcO+CXFHGCGunqq7JyndDtRCTko6ydXQZJmQ2FS3pybniPDRABZLFml9JOiy8B/5gh4I77/FKGGFCWZsP1pv+6U4FazGoiyl1LXH1lD9AIlS95zWkEA==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 14 Jun 2021 19:50:56 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 621FB10CFD51; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 15:50:54 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 14 Jun 2021 15:50:54 -0400
Message-Id: <20210614195054.621FB10CFD51@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: Alex_Brotman@comcast.com
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB4351B731B053D51E093BBE51F7319@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/MmoVD7RQBp94LUkIteaKJKZFqcw>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Extensions in Aggregate Reporting - Feedback Requested
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 Jun 2021 19:51:05 -0000

It appears that Brotman, Alex <Alex_Brotman@comcast.com> said:
>To summarize,
>
>We'd like to see extensions available both below the "feedback" and "record" elements.  The -02 draft only has it below the "feedback" element.  I agree that all
>elements, each time they are utilized, should mention a reference as to how they are to be utilized.
>
>We'd also like to have extensions go through an IETF process, however, we also understand that we cannot exclude third parties from defining/deploying their own
>extensions.  I suppose we could tell report receivers they "MUST" ignore any extensions which are not IETF-approved, though that seems a bit heavy-handed.

Remember, IETF standards are about how to interoperate.  If people want to interpret private extensions,
that is fine so long as the private ones don't interfere with public ones.

While we would like it if people published the details of their private extensions, just knowing the
names is useful since that keeps names from colliding.  So we should set up a FCFS registry for
extensions, specification would be nice but not required.

R's,
John