IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposal to adopt ARC documents into the WG (toward phase 2 milestone)

Steven M Jones <smj@crash.com> Tue, 10 May 2016 18:09 UTC

Return-Path: <smj@crash.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 7A7A112D5A0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 May 2016 11:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=crash.com
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 ZHQzOG90j8vV for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 May 2016 11:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from segv.crash.com (segv.crash.com [IPv6:2001:470:1:1e9::4415]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8272912D567 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 11:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from abort.crash.com (70-36-157-26.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com [70.36.157.26]) (authenticated bits=0) by segv.crash.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/cci-colo-1.6) with ESMTP id u4AI8ix3041109 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 11:08:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from smj@crash.com)
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 segv.crash.com u4AI8ix3041109
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=crash.com; s=201506-2k; t=1462903730; bh=M9fi6EpwgySasf0TrslvR0mlp97tiMVbztbgGH+HHH4=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=rufhlQg97nJ7M9jKpplRzkIWfvH6JkZ+XGRO2XfrYxv6I9ZKl9qSQiiPsgbBQ24JJ nboo5n40J8ps/DX1ZoDc3rgqVSaOo92jSRQF3TzFGD56W6ykjeV9yLGKc5ysD3yr3S WSmNN7sc7bBj6ZY+86FTazQGsEpvaei8o3SjEQZvJOimNGd1l/nK2qgHYWWDKzZvsU SQDR8p/PRUHbJIEfKrgrleJ3OAUhaVwxj68Hu04mgNZ7G1BnaOjk1y5O/FW0At3ITW eqsOQqLm61+M3wIqv1y3RkuU1ZYwYRqoO6l0EX1dM9tO2rJHGoEITzV9/jIzH+VCMj wOpq1xlqzHJ4g==
X-Authentication-Warning: segv.crash.com: Host 70-36-157-26.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com [70.36.157.26] claimed to be abort.crash.com
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CABuGu1r3vyWkHJ3S3NwYeV14Dn+A=oiubM3eYN17w5QabdZ-7Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Steven M Jones <smj@crash.com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Organization: Crash Computing
Message-ID: <573223B0.3010709@crash.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 11:08:48 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABuGu1r3vyWkHJ3S3NwYeV14Dn+A=oiubM3eYN17w5QabdZ-7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030709060403000603010103"
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (segv.crash.com [72.52.75.15]); Tue, 10 May 2016 11:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/do5m7NCk18ei2XOWQKLv3GiBfOs>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposal to adopt ARC documents into the WG (toward phase 2 milestone)
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 10 May 2016 18:09:04 -0000

On 05/10/2016 10:23, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> Updated the subject line to start a new thread. . .sorry for the
> confusion.
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) <kboth@drkurt.com
> <mailto:kboth@drkurt.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 6:54 AM, Tim Draegen <tim@eudaemon.net
>     <mailto:tim@eudaemon.net>> wrote:
>
>         The WG will now move ahead to phase 2:
>
>           https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmarc/trac/wiki/MilestoneTwoWiki
>
>         When discussing methods and techniques that address an
>         interoperability issue, please explicitly reference the issue
>         from the draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability draft.  This will
>         allow for easier tracking of issues & proposed fixes by
>         volunteers a lot easier.
>
>
>     I would like to officially propose, and ask for the WG's support
>     of adopting https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-andersen-arc/
>     and the corresponding, but separate usage recommendations
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jones-arc-usage/ as
>     standards-track documents within the WG to help mitigate the
>     interoperability problems that were cataloged.
>
>     Specifically, in draft -09 of the interop document, I had cited
>     ARC in section 4.2 as an instance of a "[m]echanism[s] to extend
>     Authentication-Results [RFC7601] to multiple hops. . ."
>     (https://trac.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-09#section-4.2)
>     but subsequently abstracted that "work in progress" out of the
>     document to honor our milestone framework.
>

+1

I'd like to reinforce this call. ARC has great promise, but we're just
completing and testing initial implementations. There are frequent
discussions of specification changes (on arc-discuss and elsewhere),
which shows that there's substantive work to be done - and that work can
only benefit from the broader community that an IETF WG represents.

--Steve.

Steven M Jones
DMARC.org
e: smj@dmarc.org, smj@crash.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email