Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #53 (Remove reporting message size chunking) - With Interim Notes

Steven M Jones <smj@crash.com> Mon, 31 May 2021 22:50 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 526E13A0E28 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 15:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=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=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 5TiUKaohcshy for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 15:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from segv.crash.com (segv.crash.com [IPv6:2001:470:1:1e9::4415]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E98513A0E2A for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 May 2021 15:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shiny.crash.com (192-184-141-33.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net [192.184.141.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by segv.crash.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/cci-colo-1.16) with ESMTPSA id 14VMnkNw068158 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 May 2021 22:49:54 GMT (envelope-from smj@crash.com)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 segv.crash.com 14VMnkNw068158
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=crash.com; s=201506-2k; t=1622501398; bh=9Q6KQzswZLocvOUnnzYKryxmvp5mzYvxGYCV4wBEbvo=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=rzRnu6RQe42rZmtIVa0r9T+dMpXjgwhGAayktHHK7bKgP2dRUbFvgDM+paDfaOcY6 qMf2uip54LxYHeVffkxtR4C3pusB6QaoQ01oRi3KVSfAzs6uOz7XN2FpXR7oLpryQ4 HtYVfBTKiVKuC07QFYCBMOqdsWqyBddKryKnZjdx/9uFcUjV8MNXJDMnMlVF9REy3d 2GuDve139Y3ObgOD2uJF5a3W4GNMr+yznS45bVGl11ByCNGUKpwMDcySMU2X2tnIiM WojvzEamBiNrK/kZdshdbRZFUbOxD309ZViQK/Tzh3O92uf10eLnzsQHemoc/VSvzg OVXH39+Ott0Gw==
X-Authentication-Warning: segv.crash.com: Host 192-184-141-33.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net [192.184.141.33] claimed to be shiny.crash.com
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CAHej_8npHwekgJDLOV=hVPdd0OFoMumJCKL5Yitz5oWrhkQdNg@mail.gmail.com> <a8ef636c-815a-6b40-a955-b7049afba82f@crash.com> <a7fc5ba7-e17b-72b5-e81a-1dd0ac6cb418@tana.it> <CALaySJ+FGMBA2AuNzwUOyA5eccUkQ399Kc3c-oj99oZRov8oPQ@mail.gmail.com> <88957ada-7514-f664-6269-88503c1a81fd@tana.it>
From: Steven M Jones <smj@crash.com>
Message-ID: <fc795d67-1003-32cd-d99a-fa9256a802a1@crash.com>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 15:49:45 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <88957ada-7514-f664-6269-88503c1a81fd@tana.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (segv.crash.com [72.52.75.15]); Mon, 31 May 2021 22:49:54 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lRGgTGPbEg2eHPhWQOXoBKijyqQ>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #53 (Remove reporting message size chunking) - With Interim Notes
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: Mon, 31 May 2021 22:50:05 -0000

I'm not philosophically or religiously opposed to removing the size
limit but I would like to have some data, or at least informed feedback,
to justify the decision.

This feature was not in the original December 2011 specification, but
was added in the March 2012 revision (both were pre-IETF). I'm betting
that was done because of first-hand operational issues, though of course
things have changed in ~10 years and it may no longer be necessary.

I appreciate Ale's anecdote that his size-limit code has never been
triggered, that kind of information is useful. I think the larger report
generators are the best place available to get this information, and I
will try to chase down people who can provide it this week.

I think we can get the input needed to resolve this by Todd's requested
deadline, and be able to show we did the due diligence to back up the
decision.

Thanks,
--S.