[dmarc-ietf] Tree walk nits

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 21 June 2022 23:42 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 774C1C14CF14 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2022 16:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.11 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=ll5rCqtn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Fy/tO04h
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 cYnRPQ5k_HbF for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2022 16:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18793C14F749 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2022 16:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 95795 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2022 23:42:02 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; s=17630.62b2574a.k2206; bh=l1eTuvUfoMZQguoh8CWS2bkDX+pIGXQKCnxbI1sc5zM=; b=ll5rCqtnC1OcjyU3q3VjH6N18X8SR1EZxpf0JzY7pt73ud8wn6Z4rOpjDNN0aLrgysSnzt6fALgqK+PaZCkX884ZLnttt+p+1bPDqqclyxkk2d1wq9YDt1O08nQ0fLORdSu0ppjwW/Q9Va6YrIljAC022QSgwEBEylaq+vjmc1Hs+Pq6dYTeFtRLHDJYY9xGRMkZ4ORPbhBpa/wBB/85K2fN/9GU7qeINbcx1t74tMqez0n18u5GtheV2O0p4vOu/1Ih+FspxmJJZLxGJJOHFSWo3lND7B61Y1uOeq0wYH+0qX/uB8o+fYhmq/ZkZCVKIV6BkBBCS+1UQUAYlGNgrA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; s=17630.62b2574a.k2206; bh=l1eTuvUfoMZQguoh8CWS2bkDX+pIGXQKCnxbI1sc5zM=; b=Fy/tO04hqojvRHfro9T6Hu1ewZrahTwPokPifhr6gviYHkNJNxFt7BH/4U3XzSbieCVG3JbrXY2a4Eup92yOa5ZSHsyhs9tuAvI5L0J2y36ArCOAZbJp8+3KPCBboBnt8Kms3/gFjDEe5EXCpsLCCZ/z0f+0F0J5yeI29BQo9AKS/tdIkprnI1QVvVkj7SdEMGf7kJLKEt2LExIKP6H6eABwzR3TcFolVm6/I3yml3uKaXuBLSHTm+cugRRhnP1LWVmbcFKnebfCGvuVQEU4uD8Ots79v9eRAR/VRMwAMXj1VGdh6dinjaCkJij5n+JIkrFBbGWmGG678kjX+DbllA==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 21 Jun 2022 23:42:02 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2B60243F4D99; Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:42:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832C743F4D7B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:42:01 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:42:01 -0400
Message-ID: <fc09174a-24d3-1874-0871-152ea3a92b99@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/xatrFvjoKWgRHXWoCeEvoZk5nOQ>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Tree walk nits
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: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 23:42:11 -0000

I've been staring at the tree walk description and see a few places where 
it could be clearer, and one place where I think it's wrong, left over 
text from the old downward walk.

If this discussion isn't clear enough I can do a pull request with the 
proposed changes.

In the description of the tree walk in sec 4.6, it appears that you always 
walk up to the root even if you've already found the record you're going 
to use. In steps 2 and 7 I would add "If one valid record remains, stop 
and use that record."

The part with the numbered list in sec 4.8 is confusing.  Step 3 says 
"select the record for the domain with the fewest number of labels" which 
I think is wrong, should be the most labels.  I would rewrite the whole 
section to say to use the record found by the tree walk, and the three 
numbered items say how to interpret it.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly