IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] SPF, a cautionary tale

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Mon, 06 May 2013 08:31 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549FA21F8F0D for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 May 2013 01:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.348
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.348 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.251, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7uBRfQVKSolJ for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 May 2013 01:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC5521F8F0C for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 May 2013 01:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hm14so2277403wib.17 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 May 2013 01:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Ghxvygl9w0u30i4Pw81l7Qm4CUYo4IoffShYN/dCHxI=; b=XjnzVUk2IZLpQ8k4f/27qF/cJJb7OCArWRMfM3TWaYfYPxg6JVF5FkeR+uI1G0YKhH ewMgZJZAcnVX7D+LTsvWV1mMy3goVUjM/w6sHh4Awok/mmzA3E/M1UX5/3znYaxkQUdC /dRetC7t0SeelB4r8QL8PxIM38RaFVh9wGIZOn4duPN7TvvQDPnhDGuYAYfydCsDZcLI 9B6TE/Tgbx25b7pdIvpV+se4m+Xp/gAwpl6wCc9xCe2Q3mAGTh6t1w7LinrOqUAkX5Lx IIRgEndhFlKo3DJK8kW4Mz/IVfgxKOMPD/NqgjH/SWViNfj90UQDpJgRiNONHYdR65UK iO3w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.59.208 with SMTP id b16mr23957950wjr.15.1367829076823; Mon, 06 May 2013 01:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.14.34 with HTTP; Mon, 6 May 2013 01:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130506011236.A1AD633EB06B@drugs.dv.isc.org>
References: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63077516EA82@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <20130503171843.39672.qmail@joyce.lan> <20130504133312.GA27772@vacation.karoshi.com.> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1305041103360.8602@joyce.lan> <20130505012216.GA29079@vacation.karoshi.com.> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1305042223280.10848@joyce.lan> <20130505032549.GA30757@vacation.karoshi.com.> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1305042327490.11044@joyce.lan> <20130505085348.GA6061@vacation.karoshi.com.> <20130505110635.0D83433E9BFC@drugs.dv.isc.org> <CAL0qLwa-fWyB2NtVdMu02-iz8ZWnYo3+PJ4qFtxYeWe=KQtiwA@mail.gmail.com> <20130506011236.A1AD633EB06B@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 01:31:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwaiL64XLxyKX2i94NAfAvMOqJwfdL3R9oB01FxJ=VEEsg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b86de323cd4af04dc088666"
Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, "dnsext@ietf.org Group" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] SPF, a cautionary tale
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 08:31:18 -0000

On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

> And RFC6686 is biased as it use the Alexa top X which is known to
> use more load balancers which are often not RFC 103[45] compliant
> name servers.  They don't do negative answers properly.  Fixing one
> set of nameservers in the Alexa top X can drastically change the
> numbers as many domains Alexa top X are served by identical sets
> of name servers.
>

1) I think you're supporting RFC6686's conclusions there.

2) There was more than just the Alexa survey in RFC6686.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email