Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-dmarc-01-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov <> Wed, 21 November 2018 11:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0441512F1A2; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 03:33:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=POwTh2Iu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=XWBF/Enm
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xPAVOmR9NHgM; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 03:33:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F4A41298C5; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 03:33:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CFBA21F83; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 06:33:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from web5 ([]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 06:33:19 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h= message-id:from:to:cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:subject:in-reply-to:references; s=fm1; bh=hIE TCaUKRYE2XxcprlI0mWEWopNZd4CY0VW25Y4RXQE=; b=POwTh2IuW16Oe6bMHK+ WwGwUoERNQQGNi2+0zJ5bgST3+9F7r5ntkyPjRhfQI1djA1jRM9cHa3dKUWLEmZZ jpgQ+oRPotW4fRwmc9+oQ6hXM92PiFHEGJZOPvqs2tof2r4ZeNhDfBeu89wMNEgO Q4W7rIIs9Pc4DfoNCVTwZDeEmTwTZnS0prFhVGhMz3Yq/t/mAmsOfIqagil4izCe g27O8afGxUZU8a/tKgxvNc9t+1jY0eNR8mV5G3sl9Fa+3nUZFGh57RomQmhl3W3X 0IFGlHFLD8s5gGWxphjATzk2DukQL/0Zjg2b7i3H8WTKscxDaD7SRr8z6SgJOui/ qdQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding: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=fm1; bh=hIETCaUKRYE2XxcprlI0mWEWopNZd4CY0VW25Y4RX QE=; b=XWBF/EnmsRmzmw53fs6MycaYBkJK/mbOfy+dcYO8OpVBDgAQdA28cFJfv qF/32wGmOg5ZjXseR8oUddfvyuDI/SklIW2Hkl8WfLUhNM1Y8UMUHcbwUzXBm0Fr VnmmNTZNGrmDo+Y3ajP34Hpvb2NZO2qJjAEZkZAq03fjNMt2Z1x6rS8r1pH8Tdap U1wnEgWnUiA5WM41vlbNg2wIVJVoUDGyTmMypgS6j0B78Tcp2BAJPZwvotY+QY23 er+xEJkpPKzsTt6W5zcsbfkNFdf567+YDuit1apdKmeCovzSkivk/wxV325vDWLu AVMwvOux6wgL+kNzxAe80ePvHeNYQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:f0L1W6pXQU2qk9FXjbLKjRvDAwOiVfRsCucsbptWgwiYq1ILataydw>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:f0L1W_rk9D-2BOMJ9iC2HMJ0buwf9Cikkfr_irDzxjDyZDc4VdlUAg> <xmx:f0L1W-Ot8QXqAPA2yl_lACFexXALGw-sEE66a1v8V59lTd0ahGOEqQ> <xmx:f0L1W5V7RRKKyFZdRmMHN2rEio2dZT3Fb8MV3_MITVmTwAHW_A0-Pg> <xmx:f0L1W5sNtZphs6bOHR0XBTgJi4_7im326TIRMVKD5eBXbLyKnkuyow> <xmx:f0L1W80haQWCV2eruBvq6tpRUZqN6G1mLg-ttzyz-txk6pABAE7lYg> <xmx:f0L1W5gI_1rSQhvyEiMvXzL8dhPI-rY2p3sSEpkcfTrkx07JzLAHfw>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id F13E39E11A; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 06:33:18 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <>
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
To: Alissa Cooper <>, The IESG <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface - ajax-3449945b
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 11:33:18 +0000
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-dmarc-01-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 11:33:23 -0000

Hi Alissa,

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018, at 9:03 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-dmarc-01-00: Block
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (1) I realize this re-charter is motivated by a small update, but it seems
> confusing to maintain text that is out-of-date when publishing a re-charter.
> Someone already pointed out the issue with RFC 7960; I would also argue that
> the following change is needed:
> The existing DMARC base specification has been submitted as an
>    Independent Submission to become an Informational RFC.
> The existing DMARC base specification has been published as RFC 7489 in the
> Independent Stream.


> (2) "Any issues related to the email authentication space ..." seems like a
> rather broad charge. I understand the desire to work on
> draft-levine-appsarea-eaiauth, but does that really justify this much wider
> charter expansion? I feel like the point of the chartering process is to avoid
> this kind of catch-all.

I was trying to clarify that this only meant things like SPF/DKIM/DMARC, and not, for example, SASL. But it looks like my attempt wasn't successful. How about something like this:

   Any issues related to the email authentication space (SPF/DKIM/DMARC) that
   are large enough to mandate working group review but do not already fit under
   the charter of any existing working group can be considered for adoption by DMARC.

   Extensions to SPF/DKIM/DMARC that do not already fit under
   the charter of any existing working group can be considered for adoption by DMARC.


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "2. Reviewing and improving the base DMARC specification
>    The working group will not develop additional mail authentication
>    technologies, but may document authentication requirements that are
>    desirable."
> It's not clear how documenting authentication requirements implies directly
> improving the base specification.