Re: [dmarc-ietf] AD review draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Wed, 27 February 2019 14:25 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 0AEDC131038 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:25:19 -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=z9e2FYdG; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=E7zpmwQE
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 JBN809VCZXbd for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:25:17 -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 8504A131029 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:25:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201812e; t=1551277511; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=aPbsSDi+YLs6SPdD4lcCg7LASgVmM5kX5EkRCeLhxeo=; b=z9e2FYdGWGdr0YCgx9yjgMxSBPnv3HXc9Go4iNlmDBuZWAMqZBTpSQkq ea3X1m8eaygt5gRCnnFqvnk5pEhcBQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201812r; t=1551277511; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=aPbsSDi+YLs6SPdD4lcCg7LASgVmM5kX5EkRCeLhxeo=; b=E7zpmwQEo/N6PL7+mdHadccaIS/7L1QDKNvUN7ClTtr/itHk728V83YP fNj3F1NpTMzUvhY6YG1xM6kQectuchjhR73JOC3SofNC19BC7TmV/yhUTg PtKL96ieFuyAbVZsgkb/F8A1OsAI05BJAlBhda/upHmHgFo6JWXo4r2jyM eMtqD6U6YsnLFoOfeJ7GyjGz9V7w7P6EGK3Cgdsn7qcZ3k6dng3Snl4uZw sVfaU7UCwVnQ3JWVwtawudP5ag3xOIgXSEcozVegKjlP63YNGCFGJqrGTw X5X0IN4CveBCM/RtFts8smjY3c12VPxG2AXuQcY2xfijMTUOtflEGQ==
Received: from [10.249.149.26] (mobile-166-170-35-113.mycingular.net [166.170.35.113]) (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 563802D4016A; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:25:11 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:25:09 +0000
In-Reply-To: <d8ab4dc7-4bd8-4333-12e7-1ff9d894145b@isode.com>
References: <d8ab4dc7-4bd8-4333-12e7-1ff9d894145b@isode.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: <43798E02-A35B-413E-9D10-1A7E1360C361@kitterman.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/m6CIbnMqrAcZOqXy-_jGMSrBU8g>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] AD review draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02
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, 27 Feb 2019 14:25:26 -0000


On February 27, 2019 1:56:25 PM UTC, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>This document is in a good shape, but I have a couple of minor things 
>that I would like to see fixed before initiating IETF LC:
>
>4.  SPF and internationalized mail
>
>    SPF macros %s and %l expand the local-part of the sender's mailbox.
>    If the local-part contains non-ASCII characters, terms that include
>   %s or %l do not match anything.  (Note that unlike U-labels, there
>is
>    no way to rewrite non-ASCII local parts into ASCII.)
>
>The SPF RFC is using %{s} and %{p}, so I appreciate if the text above
>is 
>updated appropriately.

A related point ...

The draft currently says it updates RFC 7208, but is that right?  It only explicitly documents what's already defined there.  Should that be removed?

Scott K