IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-srose-dkim-ecc-00.txt

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 08 April 2017 19:52 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 554AC12946A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:52:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 1IfvUluAfp2i for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D9A1127A97 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 62325 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2017 19:52:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2017 19:52:16 -0000
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 19:51:54 -0000
Message-ID: <20170408195154.57728.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: tzink@microsoft.com
In-Reply-To: <CO2PR00MB01203E4C66FD0D68137CAB91A30C0@CO2PR00MB0120.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/phbn0-M1Neupsmbbad7FXz2fa60>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-srose-dkim-ecc-00.txt
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: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 19:52:18 -0000

>Maybe we can build timelines into the updates. By Jan 1, 2019, receivers SHOULD (MUST?) no longer support the
>following key sizes or algorithms. That way, if anyone complains that a particular DKIM-signature is not
>considered valid, we can always say it’s RFC non-compliant.

The IETF historically hasn't done that.  Would would make a difference
is if some of the big gorillas (you know who you are) said you'll stop
accepting weak signatures as of some date, then actually do it.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email