IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alternative draft text for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Wed, 31 May 2017 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@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 233EC12945C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 wwHHGxJ9KJCZ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x233.google.com (mail-vk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::233]) (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 311D41267BB for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id p85so16249655vkd.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=I1+MTJ58uiA8/J2odRqh97CBOzcTHWx/Jynm7eRb7hM=; b=M7ETNXWKxYRnhd8BdiIYpakR9HzmX2y7JKZ7hfohuS9gu8Go6o9/pSABENaqmbSHm5 AOJATddg9E99zXW0EVWsk0EdI1uDVUb1lfwoH6mPe4ty48+6FBIXwzPPZFICeHuqy0WM ZKG3GrU8hxtS+F4Lbr/dyaKFIzbhHTY2XfI43gwp6RLndhBXUR3FHzGmXy+l3Jymak9E jRAePZZ4OynuiVnJkq4qC7il68ZhEh5WttW0IVIt/cXxiHT2JS+btWW3yftYwXFV/icA YVD556Cn5UY6kivFjfXvE3fnA34MeGfYeftDPnWi7tDBdDrG2xGo6J+MZDLwUr65c7Ju MbKw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I1+MTJ58uiA8/J2odRqh97CBOzcTHWx/Jynm7eRb7hM=; b=V3Qpj8m/pP6hP74Asb43UNe7sPapKlbs+6HX5e28OCti7+K+e7q8izhAinBZOK7ajx PtOj6cch1DYFHdb3FImI8BHMXDfPQfusJ+fIf2XgsDxDej35j09tNomerxlL7unvZY12 V6DdCWzoe1UeLVLc45pnquqHiK55/Nqm4CSCEfKY2+iTLh14ndoa2BMpCBuL4B7HXoYO XCQv0G714q5XTBYvCRHBGF2beniQBUCCiumV9AhRnEuvjoOhP/ZH/XzDVUU9ewHzXdnJ dOkBEJDGIG7yZccuxhwWbJq6Nd+vDkd84WmtyDRzq9HgpSKZ5ZFi8G8+YGINaKMfNb5t ddBg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDaOPnSMdWvQVLrqDPod0MvmE86D4B8qTa/o4c1nqeS3j/ywxXY 3kcLDv+mK1M/P6XvI//cHmeFp4XLsA==
X-Received: by 10.31.78.133 with SMTP id c127mr12841395vkb.121.1496270768278; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.25.69 with HTTP; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANtLugMJV9_SOp0tSnjODmo7viiChk5NupVq5+7od_4scQ2iJg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZEeL8ksPK3AwXjty1+RRUgAH=kL1MUOwERGiGxOGd5NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABa8R6vL720q879ks7ELPBH6aXjigntmHQ65hy86T-MQvLJ6+g@mail.gmail.com> <CANtLugMJV9_SOp0tSnjODmo7viiChk5NupVq5+7od_4scQ2iJg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:46:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwbeu6MBi7vN2iJ4waZAAVcEjBjEuoz2q79Jk06_EUxmJw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gene Shuman <gene@valimail.com>
Cc: Brandon Long <blong@google.com>, "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11485262a1929e0550d9afc3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/oaO3KOCyA5I4Cv-mR4j00ILkYto>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alternative draft text for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 31 May 2017 22:46:24 -0000

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Gene Shuman <gene@valimail.com> wrote:

> I've taken a look at the proposed draft and have a few notes as well.
>
> 4.  The currently specified limits on i= are not included MUST >10, SHOULD
> > 50, etc
>

50 seems oddly high.  I think sendmail out-of-the-box limits you to 20
Received fields, for example.


> 5.1 - In the current draft, it's mandated that AMS must use relaxed header
> canonicalization, but that's missing from the proposed draft
>

Deliberately.  What's the purpose of that limit?


> 5.2 - I'm a bit confused by the comment noting the importance of i=2.
> What is it that you're intending there?
>

Ask Seth.  :-)


> 5.3.1 - typo:  one of three possible values: -> one of *four* possible
> values
>

Fixed in source.


> 7.2 - It may be worth elaborating more on the possible ways in which
> cv=invalid can arise, if not here, maybe somewhere else
>

Sure.


> 7.4 - In general I prefer this to the psuedo code in the current draft,
> but I think it could still use a bit of work.  In particular, sections C-H
> are exactly describing how to validate a DKIM signature and seems somewhat
> unnecessary. Is there any particular reason you decided to include this, as
> opposed to just relying on the DKIM spec for this?
>

Mainly because of the fact that there are considerations around the "cv"
before and after that set of steps.  I'm not partial to a list of steps
part of which live in some other document.


> 7.5 - typo: no -> all
>

Fixed in source.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email