Re: [dmarc-ietf] Summary comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 20 March 2020 19:38 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@gmail.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 D22C33A0D44 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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=gmail.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 0idruKoFEZcO for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x236.google.com (mail-oi1-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::236]) (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 358373A0C32 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x236.google.com with SMTP id k8so7827015oik.2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=sWegkz7o3AQDwWo9BAsB65A9ttHxwkuhhPHebnmlVlM=; b=h/wdoGdhjnC/YlmBNjD8OgFKDeG7Eu+9cQJjE2aPq4Akw9gyllc0TScf6TIdvMvZ7Y rHF2oSWF0anPEN+IzKrtZhw+WHNdiWtsUVW8KAbxM/e2UUFHBKYCdRVC0OwF56K/hqJA x1a/ZDSgxyG1MduuLdOG62b9hLSiUAmU+qrSnsW6UbVhgg4Rwv/i1xzvwTQTU/hHhO1G slcqhcd3Ndzmz4YfrjCO9dgSgjottnrsUnESaszr3EerXQXvqA781ZJJtV9DxHQpjHo6 JV0ynTDPkddYgJkIiPRprQyrA7/LmLoTT5oxczPUxGE+TkNizbC8Pj7d18RhF3VGHU67 58WQ==
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; bh=sWegkz7o3AQDwWo9BAsB65A9ttHxwkuhhPHebnmlVlM=; b=HU1kJfQsiP2sJjhzAvXNu/D3eRRhlbVbvBZqO4C0+Te14QPkciQou6q1hiN2B6xcQ3 zlO9hpIBI9AmfjgYvD99EpXgZdBir8u6XNXENqv0pLL0rUqwYPlnoZSlaPUoBAn/cW0a y86duNLPzb7r7so9RD/j5eQnX5eF9rgSIS3YYOeA6zSolSGlMP+2FVTajF8KIu4qsyLP 0qZj+GNGt22kDeWMAsEHrX5PIPueDvTytwTn467ofyGTJsqUvm3nru+McJx48OxZiWup vq7Bu6o8seNmcGZ1torForMRIS8JWgNqsEhYKA61Bo0+Wre7gBhkNiLtXQllRob/lg/n E7Vg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2XHyxkboo70Vy/iQZ12rHKfAYOSaKlYW1mweMP+kc9pD0DZzDf eoKh/zpMEEcVsOjiWcUUUeLn2ne3z35TN8d+20adQQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vtfxz31SiA53rauuWwwUnyF+iVognK0lcLBt86q?= =?utf-8?q?z5iSz/iIcwJpAEDJviPbmldLhIa7kKhQJMMpZTjoUWEeAmE=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:a54:4496:: with SMTP id v22mr8060954oiv.132.1584733118630; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 12:38:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL0qLwZwz+R52ydEgn7Qpu8t4=5WSH0xLUijs48FWB00vbQ49g@mail.gmail.com> <20200319011703.E1A70163EB3F@ary.qy>
In-Reply-To: <20200319011703.E1A70163EB3F@ary.qy>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:38:26 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+G1p=XCaudN4g5Pic_=oOG3YFf6Ksa+ag-S=ZY4mKWMcw@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009990c205a14e6e43"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lzQixfCTaIT5huUlb3c-YSyPm04>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Summary comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
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: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 19:38:44 -0000

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:17 PM John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> In article <CAL0qLwZwz+R52ydEgn7Qpu8t4=
> 5WSH0xLUijs48FWB00vbQ49g@mail.gmail.com> you write:
> >> Consider: From foo@bogus.bogus.bogus.bogus.bogus...
> bogus.bogus.example.com
> >>
> >Yeah, I'm familiar with the nature of the attack.   But based on what
> >amounts to the hallway track, it feels like the perspective of the DNS
> >community these days is that the currently deployed DNS infrastructure
> >could easily deal with such an attack, ...
>
> The DNS crowd is finally admitting to themselves that Sturgeon's Law
> applies to the DNS, too, and a little more crud will be lost in the
> large amoung ot noise.  I gather than people are implementing RFC 8020
> which makes this attack less effective.
>
>
+1 to what John says here.   I mean, I was still seeing a non-trivial
number of A6 queries.

tim