Re: [dmarc-ietf] WGLC review of draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-30

Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com> Sun, 31 March 2024 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <seth@valimail.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 0E2B3C14F61E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 12:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.096 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=valimail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZzkUQ7estsiJ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 12:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24D7EC14F60D for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 12:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7cc77e74b5cso161601939f.2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 12:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=valimail.com; s=google2048; t=1711914560; x=1712519360; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9N/vZ8xCOZF6QqVl8RCDQxlv9PdbLC66G1uWWq2+tms=; b=KwloP5O43VoIHjLmSQP5BlfYSO1AMZW73zrq/W6IEbqaFQlIJCktNgIhF9TZe9nGC1 MVOWJnzEk7WLSOcPNLaHZnEC3X48s/N4rNpVXAktH9s782LfwB1Fn6wdu+fsfsugV4Qf 3eCgFvQyigd6QWpSMB89v5dyyCaF+uVLorYVNXlRvmMXk/RocFUdUhKVEduEASS6Z0Rd VqnHxNd2fe53V4ySD8B2XTOX0lP3nz/eVvaRbfD9Ul3F+qO2sNXB1Y4OlX8J02A4Cxap qi1Swl+SyUqaiRV/Qnlr8A6A/OiR5FHF+L1vjDCwRPzkF0C90G1AE7XjkxzfBiRT9BmA N+fA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711914560; x=1712519360; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=9N/vZ8xCOZF6QqVl8RCDQxlv9PdbLC66G1uWWq2+tms=; b=SpJz27X2JcYNdi0hs03zqmWrhPnHgGq6peo7hZll/yzhd4ufNITIiYxUb4pg2PfaBS pNBoIQV932qF4qdDeLAVZvdCx0eedzlsOBzA4cR+zkVDp2rVghBss1MM1ZKDrct775Y+ Gbk3CirraG4hxJiELADmCa9jtz1OQSBgp2+dB+SkrYkeEOMT0Iv6wamV/98s0PB76dts kQbxwLZFYwYLj2UAKz+7iok4tyUOMpH2Y8oqKi5PaMhVmZHlpiOt/g0++D9ROFhHjsZd ntPI/d/H6ZhEcI56aqvShFX8i0xXGieGZGyDqi8EwLJ+yF0YbxBGP1iZJnBeoYfbRitN Gq4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxqSO1V/oA7h+oId5CFTb6zm8ZByt5Vaqv9PCZyx/3offARKbN5 PX2asoCqS7qUoXLd/VHIwEqK6frek/srduyINHJT7VnHwga7RkaeA3fBJE87QAslw7rRX8O4/V0 4OE+ZBIvDWWN/bu8jq7Y6O0tLQMHc3E2RwNqR4Px57XRUIh+e
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEuvKm7SPD5K3CxBZYmhvX4jUHVRWFYm5PcCaZXHxvh07J8yFzf4dGTMc/xbaYIaXPpxmBtzI0OJRgDlM2Wa2w=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1c2c:b0:368:c9e2:b36c with SMTP id m12-20020a056e021c2c00b00368c9e2b36cmr11291823ilh.21.1711914559900; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 12:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F5158C76-BD86-4540-965D-F0D8664B6CD9@bluepopcorn.net> <85761761-ad6a-2a19-da82-344ed52c2391@iecc.com> <B4365E6E-00DF-425E-9974-6EE1DE057319@bluepopcorn.net> <4d462513-6c1a-c1da-d62c-68d41bba6465@iecc.com> <CEC36155-584E-46FD-AE3E-AB511CBD843F@bluepopcorn.net> <5d153d2c-a2c6-097d-a249-27e95ff9323d@iecc.com> <A9A1C60A-D49B-4519-976C-133B2470F59C@kitterman.com>
In-Reply-To: <A9A1C60A-D49B-4519-976C-133B2470F59C@kitterman.com>
From: Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 15:49:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOZAAfMo9AN4-YeFN+1P9m0SHtZYiAs45_KRRq6Kd6FpRpbxbw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003aabde0614fa2bf3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/TKeN-8T0PQsBF38vtE2CCvrsWuM>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] WGLC review of draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-30
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 19:49:25 -0000

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 1:40 PM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On March 31, 2024 5:32:13 PM UTC, "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
> >>>> I’m probably being pedantic here: is “gov” a domain?
> >>> Yup, it's a domain.
> >> I stand corrected on that.
> >
> >Anything that meets the DNS spec is a domain namen, e.g.,
> argle.bargle.parp is a domain name.  If and how particular names might be
> resolved is a topic to which the IETF and ICANN have given a certain amount
> of attention.
> >
> >> Might be worth bumping up. Examples:
> >>
> >> execute-api.cn-north-1.amazonaws.com.cn
> >> cn-northwest-1.eb.amazonaws.com.cn
> >>
> >> (Amazon seems to have most of the really long ones)
> >
> >None of those Amazon ones are used for mail so they're irrelevant to
> DMARC, but see Seth's recent message.  He says he's seen mail domains 8
> deep.
>
> I need to write a response to that, but he's made the claim before and
> they are from deep within a PSD.  The idea that we need to change the
> number as a result got no traction.
>

That's not true. There was not consensus on a new N, but there was also not
resistance to increasing it. Multiple operators have confidential examples,
and I also have some.

Remember, the issue is with *reporting* discovery and not org domain
lookup. Those that collect reports see the issue, but cannot break client
confidentiality to share the examples.



>
> Scott K
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>


-- 

Seth Blank | Chief Technology Officer
Email: seth@valimail.com


This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.