Re: [dmarc-ietf] Doing a tree walk rather than PSL lookup

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <> Wed, 25 November 2020 01:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66AE33A0D86 for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:07:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.198
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mrJEFpWCieZD for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:07:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30B293A0D7A for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:07:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id r5so336575vsp.7 for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:07:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=XH1RUF986jvahEoOzml/gpi3ZAeNyDYGzquDaElcebw=; b=M7Vkbfp31wCNXLdnaKzFQIkHQD3Srf7bbtsWe6DPWn3IH7MpbDVlOX5cl7aeKiRqKT L1JGZ5KQHXERxe1KYrOJdKsfpyx0rvhxA80ENO02EjttqIGClGtTH1upn1uXg5qT44DL fbpcPS5a2S8POd0zUimO5U0u7UmjRQmciTFDd80/+CZDEyOSwZY8kKmPmWTmdSvil0Rj WGiezLa8cF11FQEUz3V+renQOqlGIPGjWynv8UgBc0zZkBfQ6550mkhSXOQsrXm2tkiu 08L7YvUTG2D1qrRX69uy4Oi6N2iUtywnLBOax/x9aAR7L3F9SK5HAbY6t9ytJ35j7Iif Z4Rw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XH1RUF986jvahEoOzml/gpi3ZAeNyDYGzquDaElcebw=; b=d0Gn15NiSq7hAP9nYvIf3bMVWN//jV87I5YLnsAP+l/CB+5wi1+ze2jK+sis87Wms9 LXh+WPBY+66g7O/wK5+pfXkbOqHMhnp0mTTV8TtX+sQ+0aQ78iVfm0oPAFq5hp4CyDNr qVjgllnlk+J8ycYRRrvKPyYhGB0zYSanpHvMwzHM8TzOtXaTmSXW83GihJaiOWITAEdO p69Hh26okkYh92KFllUT11VskSpa2KXxj+xI18wlNWV2mZIwRlI5fvw5f8JUrRFe2iwL elWl8JHUcmqwm7vtKsDkE1BFqr39qePaQ8oxBSnHkGXVDIwGimYBcc4ecPpECSurdYo3 SOBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533AVIxwEISZhZmvOTia1Vy4uXktnfVpAftetagJf4axIrtSj/XT mYWbklvUCQdQnB8k8orvupmj4XZRJFRP3kkW8g4Hso+J
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwd1HvODvO3Fw5DDKBSS1NbO7SJkvD5YPGhV1skW/T96VfpiRx8DJ789AxL1YvbmKmA/srU5b4/jfPaMkwgcYA=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:783:: with SMTP id 125mr550536vsh.15.1606266422211; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:07:02 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201123213846.EB14127C8160@ary.qy> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:06:49 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: Alessandro Vesely <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000082c94805b4e40b75"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Doing a tree walk rather than PSL lookup
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, 25 Nov 2020 01:07:04 -0000

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:47 AM Alessandro Vesely <> wrote:

> The PSL is the result of a community-maintained effort.  They do not
> follow
> intricate naming restrictions that ccTLDs might theorize, but actively
> track
> subdomains as they become visible/ noticed.  It is remarkably good.

I'm curious as to whether this is the consensus opinion of the PSL.  It's
my impression that it is not, given the arguments that supported the
creation of the DBOUND working group in the first place, for instance.

The citations you made here appear to support that notion as well.