IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] WGLC review of draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-30

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sun, 31 March 2024 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <sklist@kitterman.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 2B2EEC14F5FD for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 10:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b="mANxcpvB"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b="L7XLRkxl"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yoD8WQ4aaPlg for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 10:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2F6BC14F5E4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 10:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E21A9F80275; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 13:40:03 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1711906788; h=date : from : to : subject : in-reply-to : references : message-id : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=a32elrGplnNesYJS2pSk+LZcgEV0zi8qroz2V7m54ug=; b=mANxcpvBVKWiWQ9rvfNvTSAbx2vZXpHCh4z+K13hwnXhXZB+4QqG+H3+RenpjEP8gjtST ESZ4KAIo7j9G1J7Dw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1711906788; h=date : from : to : subject : in-reply-to : references : message-id : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=a32elrGplnNesYJS2pSk+LZcgEV0zi8qroz2V7m54ug=; b=L7XLRkxl8gEmk7buC1NCgfoMcbeeiuPfsInQPBlScLNbRNwkRO/9PVVW6uUZXwoEV1CEV wyTKj+sRCtyR5k/gXqnB7lwF14au2SqwfQCsyBnTIB4SVNzloZuLM+2pk45yOOykEwLtw/i zgxj0KsCLrJjgSUsCrMmnlobrgiw48CNrhEhsBjGE/VwdG1mexaU2alNKN9dn7n34mQSyOf pBL9n0Rwb1iTOUTV3if0p940sBVhP0PbvRMg3zuSt0YrckE1XdHuzTq0gpP2O4yMlaqqfWn zuTb36TvC9qgeIS+NqH3TxHX6/bOUZQZamch47gUSKlEr4CUafMgZnad79Rw==
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mobile-166-170-28-32.mycingular.net [166.170.28.32]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 786E2F80156; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 13:39:48 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 17:39:42 +0000
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <5d153d2c-a2c6-097d-a249-27e95ff9323d@iecc.com>
References: <F5158C76-BD86-4540-965D-F0D8664B6CD9@bluepopcorn.net> <85761761-ad6a-2a19-da82-344ed52c2391@iecc.com> <B4365E6E-00DF-425E-9974-6EE1DE057319@bluepopcorn.net> <4d462513-6c1a-c1da-d62c-68d41bba6465@iecc.com> <CEC36155-584E-46FD-AE3E-AB511CBD843F@bluepopcorn.net> <5d153d2c-a2c6-097d-a249-27e95ff9323d@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <A9A1C60A-D49B-4519-976C-133B2470F59C@kitterman.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/w5PTvImKb6bvHFbtHtUfrM8ewbc>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] WGLC review of draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-30
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 17:40:18 -0000


On March 31, 2024 5:32:13 PM UTC, "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>>>> I’m probably being pedantic here: is “gov” a domain?
>>> Yup, it's a domain.
>> I stand corrected on that.
>
>Anything that meets the DNS spec is a domain namen, e.g., argle.bargle.parp is a domain name.  If and how particular names might be resolved is a topic to which the IETF and ICANN have given a certain amount of attention.
>
>> Might be worth bumping up. Examples:
>> 
>> execute-api.cn-north-1.amazonaws.com.cn
>> cn-northwest-1.eb.amazonaws.com.cn
>> 
>> (Amazon seems to have most of the really long ones)
>
>None of those Amazon ones are used for mail so they're irrelevant to DMARC, but see Seth's recent message.  He says he's seen mail domains 8 deep.

I need to write a response to that, but he's made the claim before and they are from deep within a PSD.  The idea that we need to change the number as a result got no traction.

Scott K

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email