Re: [dmarc-ietf] Post-IESG Review edits to RFC7601bis

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Tue, 22 January 2019 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <sklist@kitterman.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 1688B130F72 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b=8zKsXC5S; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=EqTilJ0m
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 VYPy9K8IRuDS for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from softlayer.kitterman.com (softlayer.kitterman.com [IPv6:2607:f0d0:3a01:a3::9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12DBB128AFB for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201812e; t=1548187748; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : date : subject : from; bh=WoUN2pwScHhpO11psbK9PYwchcBf1DS7Kk5Hy8YzHik=; b=8zKsXC5Sldb6Erlk7SGyJbGG1/Ybyo/49admlmbROnYQGpk7MOEqSE/0 GrMxB5MMZ7pr1JjHs24Majf0ZzhABA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201812r; t=1548187748; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : date : subject : from; bh=WoUN2pwScHhpO11psbK9PYwchcBf1DS7Kk5Hy8YzHik=; b=EqTilJ0mRj3Aac/L5UIqyLE9YWOTnGMI9p9vNlH7vRgjlkO3heLyRBKB ejOlAL/zW4lNZdft/G3ibHoBycFxoz0sHI3BCqj6Hg9543wmx11MmLhcq4 rKXZHX4dvp0jHv/1WymqZnIbOsyAIyoArf4zXS25KoHHGPCuBpLtter+F+ 1ClxAo/zhspT6iKzN+zqUY5YnSCRlgXDpxT3KYElUBYXETPUERv++P0nnU 4pOUerKfq9ENNb9YXJhYH1QS7vNAyfn8v+DZRrhttoCRyVSBYYLJizS9a6 aA/rnUW3XxFhdelri4NGjG71WrzbZoXyHPt8eo9XU4pvBg575lsH9Q==
Received: from [10.90.67.30] (mobile-166-171-59-116.mycingular.net [166.171.59.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by softlayer.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ACEE52D407A4; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 14:09:08 -0600 (CST)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 20:09:03 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZdRym=kj9qD1f8d9ShNL3o09f+gGbyc2Q-1F1HtsMpYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZdRym=kj9qD1f8d9ShNL3o09f+gGbyc2Q-1F1HtsMpYQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: dmarc@ietf.org
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Message-ID: <B9E281E0-D50B-4D34-A392-76F7FE2E82B8@kitterman.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/iryrjWJTAmv988xzQD7xavoOTVA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Post-IESG Review edits to RFC7601bis
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: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 20:09:12 -0000


On January 22, 2019 6:53:33 PM UTC, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:
>With the posting of -05, we expect the last DISCUSSes to clear (one
>already
>has) and the document can proceed.
>
>During DISCUSS discussions, it was pointed out that the ADSP, Sender
>ID,
>and DomainKeys specifications bear "Historic" status, and thus they
>should
>not be carried forward into the new version; they will continue to
>exist in
>the Authentication-Results registries, but their status will be changed
>to
>"deprecated" and their defining documents will be left at RFC7601,
>while
>the others that are still current will remain "active" and their
>defining
>documents will be updated to point to this new one.
>
>As this wasn't expressly part of the Working Group Last Call, it's
>appropriate that this be posted here and people be given a chance to
>express their opinions on this last-minute change.  Thus, with the
>Chairs'
>approval, I'll post this on Friday absent any sustained objection, and
>Alexey can then send it off to the editors.
>
>The proposed diff to -05 can be seen here:
>http://www.blackops.org/~msk/diff.html
>
>-MSK

According to the rules of the registry (as described in RFC 7601), a designated expert can change entries to deprecated without a specification.

No need to tie this to 7601bis.  Just ask IANA to make the changes (since you're the primary designated expert).

If you do that, then dropping them from 7601bis is obviously correct.  I think it's correct anyway, but that's cleaner.

Scott K