Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6376 (4926)
Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 07 February 2017 18:26 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF72E12959F for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.29
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com
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 2Fbl-I9Xq4gx for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD93812944C for <ietf-dkim-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:26:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v17IRQx1013142; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:27:27 -0800
Authentication-Results: simon.songbird.com; dkim=fail reason="verification failed; unprotected key" header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Ynih+59Z; dkim-adsp=none (unprotected policy); dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v17IRNb4013138 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:27:24 -0800
Received: by mail-qk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 11so97250958qkl.3 for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:25:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=bIp8A78Np7wHHcEVa0nqEYsNrmQQdVXFIHX0zsEoiNo=; b=Ynih+59Z72OiGBmLFMyM8MIfKlYtkVzHfn0jSIwp4V8yTPL1kZt7pwrSnzVg+KtvBc 39wliNe8bcQwzf+oIyDJ6EZh6Zobeo0cV552kLBZmUWi2RrdayeEGYjKV1x8oIgunPDt v18clVcYPbofasab0B7LSOJoq9uehLi5+36TsucY9BsAP/ERMser9bnCsyw6+YLDBzeh 0RNNOEQXeK0bUrkZylUSrBzIcB9aW8SwKAkG5Nuz2bgjAIQ6wz1LJMqC+HdC6oiWFr5O HsmK6NFNryVka98UWQJkv1BMoTa2n36DXaYHSglSsz3xBicT9ZI2CdNtOv0Usld6NAJ2 FujA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bIp8A78Np7wHHcEVa0nqEYsNrmQQdVXFIHX0zsEoiNo=; b=lpkpfYnSYgzvptOgzvHnedlno/CpxskfNd1LHxwQIxXcgVoclTkb9DzccFhXnZuVR6 zZq/S+3ghdeDjahaME1okzTqa6gm1UyrVOmTRN7BNjPAvtOTEUKvVeAk189pz3c006X3 4Tk5H9aGiQbvj3foJv0dBaQ716y6a2tH1SQgIAVptKv8iS8CT6yZ5YSZf8Bjx6wzG9Ff opuAvvq+MECU20E0WTFn1fI1wpnV94fVhXucVHcqKobTTErlo479CmHgTJtAIko3lV2E E6dtxvFSQcFLFRTvfUEfPlrJUFSR1gVgYb9brTyxW6XrREZIl+K6QajUJD2XUng/ojxP +Usg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mvdIJ1tCtD57eTSRya5viPjdciQ1MdJz08/+a9pH4XCxvGWd2HfJfrBD6fDr5baFlDw57KloLGGztSiQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.114.199 with SMTP id n190mr16888678qkc.229.1486491938579; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:25:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.19.72 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:25:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20170207181909.9946.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <CALaySJJ8QvWp=QChL9Pvt5ytySpeRnU1y4xaXAiRD9vi4M+oZg@mail.gmail.com> <20170207181909.9946.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:25:38 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: BZWjiNvxLtDWFKj_R4rOqBJlUUo
Message-ID: <CALaySJKWvg+92jSk25OvMR1J9vBqtsSgp+VUTw+KuYDY+zJS=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: DKIM Mailing List <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6376 (4926)
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DKIM Discussion List <ietf-dkim.mipassoc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/options/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mipassoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@mipassoc.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Sender: ietf-dkim <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>
>>Murray, Tony, or someone else: Can you independently check that these >>examples need the extra space in order to be verified correctly? > > Murray did that for us a decade ago -- it's one of the test cases that opendkim uses. Yes, but the point is: did Murray (or anyone) extract the text *from the published RFC* and use that as input? That is apparently what Simon did, which resulted in this report. >>Assuming they do, this errata report should be marked "Verified", but >>the type should be changed to "Editorial", not "Technical". > > Hmmn. It's really both, a technical error caused by an editorial change. No: a Technical erratum is one where the spec actually says something technically wrong, such that if you implemented according to the spec, your implementation would be wrong. Missing space characters in examples == Editorial. b _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
- [ietf-dkim] Fwd: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: [Technical Errata Reported] … Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Roland Turner
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Barry Leiba
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC63… Stephen Farrell