Re: [ietf-dkim] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6376 (4926)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 08 February 2017 07:58 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 9105712955D for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 23:58:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.791
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 MYKvJSVvbv77 for <ietfarch-ietf-dkim-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 23:58:23 -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 049691294A5 for <ietf-dkim-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 23:58:23 -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 v187x6DN004873; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 23:59:08 -0800
Authentication-Results: simon.songbird.com; dkim=fail reason="verification failed; unprotected key" header.d=cs.tcd.ie header.i=@cs.tcd.ie header.b=LIlz6p4M; dkim-adsp=none (unprotected policy); dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v187x2gv004864 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 23:59:04 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E56BE4D; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 07:57:21 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X6zdsqq5LXZN; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 07:57:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.75] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F384BE47; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 07:57:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1486540637; bh=A5qfC8WGgna7z+72YmHUGah/9CPaAoAjmVHKWRKFeV4=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LIlz6p4MwNN9OhNydYHLCJIdfjwmG1WYGRnGz3hpMYhTGD8Zt7ft9torIlOuYEx/T IqW/s6MpqkTDevdb++kJx0YMjG9G3nXCo86GWcDUEAR89GMe0h4xg03Vc9NuIUzO9e LcIXlrK0zsP4ssM2qtdGYS+wpUMokx7e1kGCRD5k=
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, Roland Turner <roland@rolandturner.com>
References: <CALaySJJ8QvWp=QChL9Pvt5ytySpeRnU1y4xaXAiRD9vi4M+oZg@mail.gmail.com> <20170207181909.9946.qmail@ary.lan> <CALaySJKWvg+92jSk25OvMR1J9vBqtsSgp+VUTw+KuYDY+zJS=g@mail.gmail.com> <84e6e9cd-738d-c642-5533-331113adb604@dcrocker.net> <CALaySJ+4R8MUndC2n7GzMPqNQHb_OCbVPJi07FY2za2rWN-DTw@mail.gmail.com> <d462a0ec-99bf-e5e0-ae39-38aa9d670122@rolandturner.com> <605de54c-5eea-48e9-cb56-944ce7985d32@bbiw.net> <CALaySJLgCrTKKKDoBO4VaHxpkf-FzE6+=tNQGWZ9E2W_u--8Aw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <ad6ff4e2-0d30-23d1-349f-76c1a6689937@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 07:57:16 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLgCrTKKKDoBO4VaHxpkf-FzE6+=tNQGWZ9E2W_u--8Aw@mail.gmail.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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3002926248090312813=="
Errors-To: ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org
Sender: ietf-dkim <ietf-dkim-bounces@mipassoc.org>


On 08/02/17 03:04, Barry Leiba wrote:
> When I was on the IESG, we had been talking with Heather and Sandy about
> what to do about fixing up the whole errata system.   Not sure where that
> is now.  It wasn't anyone's top priority at the time.

The RFC editor folks were too busy with the RFC format
fun. That's now much further along so I'd hope that it
becomes possible to address the errata system in the not
too distant future. If you care about that, it'd be no
harm to ping the IESG or an AD saying that you think it
is time to improve/fix the errata system.

Cheers,
S.


> 
> b
> 
> 
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 6:40 PM Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/7/2017 5:52 PM, Roland Turner wrote:
>>> As a passing engineer who doesn't spend that much time spelunking IETF
>>> processes, a question that appears to be begged here is why the
>>> distinction matters. This is not immediately clear from any of the
>>> Status and Type of RFC Errata page
>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/>, the How to Report
>>> Errata page <https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-report/>, or the FAQ
>>> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/>.
>>
>> <rant>
>>
>> In recent years -- and by way of demonstrated some basic process
>> problems, I'll note that I have no idea when the current constraints on
>> the process were put in place -- the RFC errata process got moved into a
>> very specialized place, to the exclusion of a number of useful
>> functions.  It's not that what it does do isn't useful, it's that it has
>> become idiosyncractic.  And, yeah, it does not appear to me that most
>> folk know what it is and is not useful form.
>>
>> </rant>
>>
>> d/
>>
>> --
>>
>>    Dave Crocker
>>    Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>    bbiw.net
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
> 

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html