Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limitations was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

"Stan Kalisch" <stan@glyphein.mailforce.net> Fri, 12 July 2019 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <stan@glyphein.mailforce.net>
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 CAF7E12083F for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=mailforce.net header.b=JApPu1VJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=zhosjkTb
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 lL0yU_QGfaB4 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D97A12083C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC8722027 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:32:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap6 ([10.202.2.56]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:32:54 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailforce.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=B9Au9DWJe+Vox53d0apzDorPut0hjfV bmCHCZbQqf+s=; b=JApPu1VJ6nJfl3zCx0+FRuTnJGVSZFC9E3kttBY7nFzDKLl +SWeuZcSSUwV8466lhmKB92AKeA/DKrhPkSkxd8SqAAYdbUqww1lejdcZ5FQy9Dn daOmhNC2zXvrccWNZY44BdsTZig52Auj4IqmE1+Q8BGZD77kgu2lq8qQxzS4xdCs oLRCHfvDa5lVemEHyyhHezvejI1ZgVkl0hF9u9aDA20neB6TWQWAZTLysEyTEtLq /9qs4Dv/cpP03ioK+lJJxc9xwf9AAyeeZ4wZNmu688V/oXBN+OwhqSQjN6OVzIpv aYoN1w3Z723QZrVOx8dXs7uzUxb++oc4D4gxTCw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=B9Au9D WJe+Vox53d0apzDorPut0hjfVbmCHCZbQqf+s=; b=zhosjkTbtMKt8IyWaSBYxY eaZk+spL33t72Cxtt/+5qFqH4aTVwFKqOVV1OcwkTOSO2Fcl6zoQcXXh6jJ0h9st FdRFPpYdTlWu41YAvbLiJhNhLVVbfYwiZ+3V3yRuboyxQ/oSpFFYcLkSDcLfCyV6 9jw2ebhXi3dzTrHDDzFpd9vU9xTS4tGUn4X/LrbyvfalcM4C2Y9m+v+urVlWgD/e RtVh2RJPgxqXSDmLyK/BH9HnKlGWgoE+/ht9Pu9RXxyCCfQndjq9OzjJah8UBzdK k153Vm3RmiQiOkHJxQIaa1Oj1Yf7+1HFdb2Kb1+UmhcHrFJCnHrkmcKeLE6mULBQ ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:VdIoXSmOkzW4zGaleemfi0CHQ5zUthht_ZTv5Mz8YQA4zryu4X2_tQ>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrhedtgdduvdehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsegrtd erreerreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfufhtrghnucfmrghlihhstghhfdcuoehsthgrnhesghhl hihphhgvihhnrdhmrghilhhfohhrtggvrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrd horhhgnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehsthgrnhesghhlhihphhgvihhnrdhm rghilhhfohhrtggvrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:VdIoXUg2_h9nZQ627oBnx-8HrNrBAJdRKyuj_6H6NFsBODKWvoUVKQ> <xmx:VdIoXXR_IYusvMCHE-PfTLGTFXc_VWCFMzKgyW6PzObaYOEye7pcoQ> <xmx:VdIoXRgY3gmuwb1kRo0jRgqX-nUmORihRu6RBBtYEkstzBkxbmZQkw> <xmx:VtIoXQj7MIyyUvx2B1Kn7Q_1HT7I500iJx6B5iy8_KqtffGaaOvOjQ>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id B1FFB1400A1; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:32:53 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.6-731-g19d3b16-fmstable-20190627v1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <22f8a413-1cad-4d14-b57c-10de332f87ff@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <12139607.XScsT9yxuP@l5580>
References: <CAL0qLwbbz_UhBLsURg=eXhRBC2g9OghiN==T9Uq9pFuLtd=b7w@mail.gmail.com> <1783751.gHVjF1RMII@l5580> <53901c28-8542-40a0-87c1-a11e935e6afd@www.fastmail.com> <12139607.XScsT9yxuP@l5580>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:32:33 -0400
From: "Stan Kalisch" <stan@glyphein.mailforce.net>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=64352c6a74cc49c1abdbc445da9424c3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/mJZI8oRDorTAbsTQOews9TUnzso>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] =?utf-8?q?Mention_ICANN/operational_limitations_was?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_Re=3A_Working_Group_Last_Call=3A_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, 12 Jul 2019 18:33:12 -0000

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, at 2:27 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, July 12, 2019 1:59:55 PM EDT Stan Kalisch wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, at 1:41 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 5:21:14 PM EDT Seth Blank wrote:
> > > > As Secretary, there are three items that have not yet reached consensus
> > > > that must be resolved during WGLC:
> > > > 
> > > > 2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to implement
> > > > are needed
> > > 
> > > There has been feedback in favor of adding this and none against so far.
> > > 
> > > The specific proposal is:
> > > 
> > > "Please note that today's operational and policy reality prevents this
> > > experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment shows that PSD
> > > solves a real problem at a large scale, the results could prove to be
> > > useful in the development of policies outside of the IETF that would
> > > permit its ubiquitous deployment."
> > > 
> > > Because RFCs are (approximately) forever, I'm concerned about words like
> > > "today's" in protocol documents, even experimental ones.
> > > 
> > > How about this instead:
> > > 
> > > "As of the writing of this document operational and policy constraints
> > > prevent this experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment
> > > shows that PSD solves a real problem and can be used at a large scale,
> > > the results could prove to be useful in the development of policies
> > > outside of the IETF that would permit broader deployment".
> > 
> > "[D]evelopment of policies outside of the IETF" strikes me as a little odd
> > since IETF isn't setting policy *per se*, although substitute language that
> > is just as succinct is escaping me at the moment.
> 
> .... removal of constraints ... ???
> 
> "As of the writing of this document operational and policy constraints prevent 
> this experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment shows that PSD 
> solves a real problem and can be used at a large scale, the results could 
> prove to be useful in the removal of constraints outside of the IETF that 
> would permit broader deployment".
> 
> Better?

I think so. "[I]n removing constraints" would flow a little better, but yeah.


Thanks,
Stan

> 
> Scott K
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>