Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ben Campbell's No Objection on charter-ietf-dmarc-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba <> Wed, 21 November 2018 21:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242F6130EF3; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:35:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zskb9dqWf1nh; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1207130EB0; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:35:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id f6so5168410iob.1; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:35:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=T/2iWcNF7FL+6Lvzl46pUodERTrhGrlicy3J9u8SUI8=; b=at+QNOijloZTHMb0e7tcPEdcC10dCbMXDiwsAOkgJHxMip6v5E7pGYUvBLbR/HOK4a sVwCYqfgCYuWMiVThKmh/cmXo55UrZzy86zBRiSMBVROSyz5dvbt/ogqpCBVkLXdNlHz 1xRQYMUx1NADk7kvZynjudXsFDvXCDj5LbFG9/8rOkeH80iq8Kfg8gRQuQRhRhFiHmzx Udiwj0VyDx5ngrrg4gfsS5IJVHuDvoDYx8nbbvB7N0QlD/fSWSudR/8sveCVpIB8nwHe Cy3hWNdJDgzFp6vibroi3D93eqp/yyKXHrV6NdGoeHj6tDX9eHBsZCJKrpJaHcpZRgED eiDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWaqUA5HLPU2BaXmw0etFWsFUkFeJdNgnHvbdMUS36yywCMriBpk XoXTqyBX4jjXGdRfcomHcpZQs9NyDXCQU+YHy6DX+A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/XWKXG1papqsuo7ANycegkAxv2kfyyul/LDXoNG+6HcPzi/epy6D5dzuKDoHK5+mGzrx5MbhZz9/SGvY0h57PE=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:2c17:: with SMTP id s23mr6342514ios.76.1542836119665; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:35:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Barry Leiba <>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:35:08 -0500
Message-ID: <>
To: Ben Campbell <>
Cc: IESG <>,,
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ben Campbell's No Objection on charter-ietf-dmarc-01-00: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 21:35:31 -0000

> I _think_ this section 4 is about MTA-MTA authentication, right? For example,
> s/mime or other e2e signature enhancements would not be in scope, would they?
> How about new user-to-MUA authentication methods?

It's unfortunate that we've settle on the term "email authentication"
to refer to what is actually much narrower than that, but, alas,
that's the terminology that's used.  What we mean by the term is more
like "validation of the email sending domain", which isn't what we
would call "authentication" in other security contexts.

So, no, anything dealing with s/mime or email content signatures are
not in the scope we're talking about here.