Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sat, 20 July 2019 03:47 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 6491412004C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.99
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=keu/+ZKh; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=YZewurHi
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 Shtnyxt03HSg for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31F43120044 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25E0BF80499 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 23:47:11 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1563594431; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=89lJWGDz7P6KEyTZOJEDZ4bL5zsAdJGHJQhtTTuwgRM=; b=keu/+ZKhaU6KHvgafDylW8vJJxQfrv/9QePTXq89XJqSe0qFueE3PCaC fqi/cG9i11Ec9CQPZre1hNv7HuN/CA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1563594431; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=89lJWGDz7P6KEyTZOJEDZ4bL5zsAdJGHJQhtTTuwgRM=; b=YZewurHiHg+eGByxFSHonb+HDv254q4sDiaLHeH1KTOdpKLwLG9+nxkR teFWwRMJ3j5WF7MPfeGVV3adk46uO1Yp7NFUguHu9BpKYfumy4H25Eodjx T7OCJsnjDZDwZhTphJLmPl/QYJhb/9Qb80s0UAKx32EAbnL3lHjhXBn2bf C1m9i1evrM6jEraJuF9+OBSS9SXDZlsEbljAp7QLKpphL7Sx/g0XxBBIGz z+3bMXVPEzCtB6NGW3p/ySqxyqaDzlLg/uEDwA0Yfpy28KVc+8m9sA9Q4+ P+mAYPZHexzGD6jK9bCcfn4W34zwKWpzidEc5ivQjDYDp6DJqmQuBw==
Received: from l5580.localnet (wsip-68-224-171-140.sd.sd.cox.net [68.224.171.140]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CE81F80042 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 23:47:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 23:47:08 -0400
Message-ID: <2329855.3qHDJPs8v9@l5580>
In-Reply-To: <7295017.bxVsTnSgkA@l5580>
References: <CAL0qLwbbz_UhBLsURg=eXhRBC2g9OghiN==T9Uq9pFuLtd=b7w@mail.gmail.com> <4789054.Ip9ilXyiH0@l5580> <7295017.bxVsTnSgkA@l5580>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="nextPart1878466.arYzq08ld2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/xojNR7STNVH9Zgp8Wgh46ExUNAw>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 20 Jul 2019 03:47:14 -0000

On Wednesday, July 17, 2019 1:07:05 AM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, July 13, 2019 3:34:51 PM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Friday, July 12, 2019 2:28:39 PM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 12, 2019 1:54:57 PM EDT Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 10:50 AM Scott Kitterman
> > > > <sklist@kitterman.com>;
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 5:21:14 PM EDT Seth Blank wrote:
> > > > > > 3. If an np= tag is needed to allow PSD functioning for only
> > > > > > NXDOMAINs
> > > > > 
> > > > > The limited feedback during WGLC has been favorable to this.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This will require a rather larger change to the document than the
> > > > > other
> > > > > issues, but they are manageable and I believe I have most of the
> > > > > relevant
> > > > > text
> > > > > from earlier revisions.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think we should include this.
> > > > 
> > > > I am much more concerned with adding another tag that can only be used
> > > > in
> > > > a
> > > > PSD-DMARC record. I would be much more open to make a "normative"
> > > > change
> > > > to
> > > > the DMARC tag list (RFC 7489 section 11.4) to define np for any DMARC
> > > > record, than to make this a special case for PSD-DMARC records.
> > > 
> > > I agree.  My intent is to add the tag to be used experimentally for any
> > > DMARC record.  Part of the experiment is to see if it's useful beyond
> > > PSD.
> > 
> > Attached is my proposed text to add the np tag.  Based on the discussion
> > to
> > date, I assume I'll be asked to add something like this after last call is
> > complete, so please let me know how to make it better.
> > 
> > Scott K
> 
> Updated rfcdiff attached.  The only change other than typos is to add
> mention of 'np' to Appendix A.

Updated again.  I believe this addresses all the 'np' related last call 
discussion.  Shortly I'll move on to what I think the group wanted on the 
other topics.

Scott K

Note:  I'm not planning on publishing diffs on every topic.  I only did it for 
'np' because it required me to write more new text that no one else had 
reviewed.