IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Scott Rose <scott.rose@nist.gov> Fri, 07 April 2017 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <scott.rose@nist.gov>
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 AC4B712943E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 05:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 j2NaGBcaFF1x for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 05:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wsget2.nist.gov (wsget2.nist.gov [IPv6:2610:20:6005:13::151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91414129434 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 05:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from WSGHUB2.xchange.nist.gov (129.6.42.35) by wsget2.nist.gov (129.6.13.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:17:16 -0400
Received: from postmark.nist.gov (129.6.16.94) by mail-g.nist.gov (129.6.42.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:17:27 -0400
Received: from had3.antd.nist.gov ([129.6.141.200]) by postmark.nist.gov (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id v37CHBpJ001191; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:17:11 -0400
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20170406235540.47811.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Scott Rose <scott.rose@nist.gov>
Message-ID: <ebf2fd36-c8bb-1983-12ad-e0875998f5bd@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 08:17:11 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170406235540.47811.qmail@ary.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NIST-MailScanner-Information:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/swbIRiuP6fNpjsblFAywK0wEV0U>
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: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 12:17:31 -0000

Ok - nice to know I'm not the only one thinking this (means I'm not 
totally crazy).  I'm willing to drop my draft and just contribute/review 
this one. There is no reason to have multiple drafts trying to do the 
same thing.

Scott


On 04/06/2017 07:55 PM, John Levine wrote:
> In article <ac345fcc-ae8e-a92a-0ec3-4792529c865d@nist.gov> you write:
>> This may be of interest to this group, as there isn't an active DKIM WG
>> anymore.
> At the DISPATCH session at IETF 98 I pitched a proposal to update DKIM
> with a new crypto algorithm and/or a more compact key representation
> (put the key in the signature and put a hash of it in the DNS.)
>
> Reaction was positive, people told me to write a proposed charter,
> which starts here:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch/current/msg06701.html
>
> Also see:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dcrup-dkim-crypto/
>
> R's,
> John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email