Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat or menage, was On splitting documents and DBOUND
Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com> Wed, 11 November 2020 18:54 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 1B89E3A0D22 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:54:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=valimail.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 7xx46AnxcmRv for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe36.google.com (mail-vs1-xe36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F0353A0D20 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:54:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe36.google.com with SMTP id m16so1749124vsl.8 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:54:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=valimail.com; s=google2048; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0ujUNiUrYh+xrfI0COOmnFdrYrZDi53f2Nbncn/Fk8E=; b=FiIh4n6WYU4aJkJva6u54+BmU+xgPxZWtEvsAwq1Y3aTg/VfhAEl4Zrd7pMwcod+u6 LecX5RN0zRjXnR0hzm19Lf3UjP0ELYJNntV+Fvp+eBOuEPSz0AZ8gvANYrb+xQquSkns mCxm1Cp7kiBA9Ei9elDgS5bsAVKhg3JSPLNpvljvuzvNQeHQHMWMo5K7Zbf2JTzFWrNS aSN+1gECy0HMO1xT0mePgzeVVf3OQ90ihfPA+BwiexLq4lAeBqrOZ4UB/6ivImD44vlC 7G3ivIu8SDG2+Qx7Q6yn0NUHeudgju79CeqBOpUagxDXxbCR/9luZflSdqYy/CA5hgBO 1fBA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0ujUNiUrYh+xrfI0COOmnFdrYrZDi53f2Nbncn/Fk8E=; b=uOE/XAnGH0yNZNp7cKd7Ke6JKDJAQN+cl7eNEb1dTFSF9V8Dyx2R+Khz5jSwvmpikp CTP+d4Prg/aD4ai8fyqtLvZUjf3LMNtUYEgQYCow1T6lnKsrxsoWgRq8VdZkrARrtdx6 3PnZq8jqqdJ1/PVEwDQKX3Mr9Bgu8MAvQt//zBzNIBFHJL1BUXtIdg5sVUiKxOQWWWOb NNs2vRkiFcMJVC/BK9JeNDTgLUX66eC8/RA/9Z9Yksb4+E5cp5/A4drtuNJ2C0YN2IDV KgCTsxLHntUw8s1B75kT2mOeiWX/hTGnwynKwVTerqPJJ32t/AasF/CWU+UHx4VC8SFD 2nIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531gtYoqbUJn/gXN8aI0BKhXJNvMq8MGwhnbGF8ZGvFm/NJufka8 vUSf/EY9dvzTMzjxb/7joCQHz9COPgNo84hk5RX01kAdYME4qg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnLh5jmnhWlX5VkyKhqm00LyS+8zefGM5LbGNXW9tmDSfEHC6jvhxgSxRTbMmIYe5WlV5Lb7TcQFObOoWwUW0=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:d84:: with SMTP id 126mr17192966vsn.43.1605120847563; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:54:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201111181837.79128262943F@ary.qy> <f1eabf10-0278-a6cc-997b-333e89446c16@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <f1eabf10-0278-a6cc-997b-333e89446c16@dcrocker.net>
From: Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:53:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOZAAfPzYUb8agF-uZ=AphQXe4D9SV-vuYvbhCe4pC3V+f-ZbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Cc: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f0e40b05b3d951d5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/inSqylbeS8HexnX7bKBnG-Qc_9E>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat or menage, was On splitting documents and DBOUND
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: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:54:11 -0000
I believe the core of this is referenced in https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/68 and can be discussed in detail when the chairs or relevant editors open that ticket. The further discussion seems to be if "org domain" (or whatever new name its given) definition and discovery mechanism should live in a separate I-D, and DMARC should simply reference this for discovery purposes. If we believe a new document is in order, we'll need an editor. I believe Scott Kitterman expressed interest in this previously, and it's also a natural extension of some of the work he's already done with PSD. Is anyone interested in volunteering to be an editor for this draft and bringing an -00 to the group? Seth, as co-Chair On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 10:25 AM Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote: > On 11/11/2020 10:18 AM, John Levine wrote: > > "Parent default" or something like that. There's no claim that it is > > or isn't in the same organization, just that it's a parent name of the > > target name. > > > > For Scott's _dmarc.BANK. thing it would deliberately*not* be the same > organization. > > > Where is such generality discussed in DMARC? I don't recall seeing it. > > DMARC has had a consistent construct, which is 'the domain name that is > at the top of the organization's administrative hierarchy". Hence, > Organizational Domain. Nothing in the term requires that it be up the > 'current' domain name chain. > ] > "Parent default" is an example of a more generic term that actually has > the same meaning, but less intuitive. For one thing, it's likely to be > quite a bit higher than the parent domain name. > > d/ > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc > -- *Seth Blank* | VP, Standards and New Technologies *e:* seth@valimail.com *p:* 415.273.8818 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.
- [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John R Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John R Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND Doug Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] On splitting documents and DBOUND Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John R Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John R Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Doug Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… devel2020
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Organizational domains, threat o… John Levine