Re: [dmarc-ietf] Comment on draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Thursday, September 5, 2019 9:02:45 PM EDT Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 9/5/2019 2:49 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > I don't think so.  The draft defines PSD as org - 1.
> 
> Writing a definition for something you don't control and that can (and
> has) change tends to be problematic.
> 
> As it is here.

Now that I'm at a computer where I can review the draft as it stands (as 
opposed to the draft as I remember it), I agree the current definition is 
problematic.  However, I think it's easily fixable.  Here's where I see a 
problem:

> 2.3.  Longest PSD
> 
>    The longest PSD is the PSD matching more labels in the domain name
>    under evaluation than any other public suffix list entry.

As you suggest, it leverages PSL in a way that's sub-optimal at best.  
Fortunately I think we can fix it.  I'd suggest this instead:

2.3.  Longest PSD

   The longest PSD is the Organizational Domain with one label removed.

With that change, PSD DMARC makes no claims based on use of the PSL that 
aren't inherited from DMARC.

How's that?

Scott K