IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] [OT] (signed TLDs)

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Tue, 15 October 2019 11:34 UTC

Return-Path: <dot@dotat.at>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6EA1200B6 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 04:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 lZCBCbqHT1Bl for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 04:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.142]) (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 5B0BA12000F for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 04:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from grey.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.57.57]:56308) by ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.138]:25) with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) id 1iKL5R-0004Lp-8F (Exim 4.92.3) (return-path <dot@dotat.at>); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:33:57 +0100
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:33:57 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.368.1910141020460.72467@ary.local>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910151228410.8949@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20191011160802.50C81C9B780@ary.qy> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1910141200120.8949@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.368.1910141020460.72467@ary.local>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/lczaD5H6bLIZOx_CMgO77BoS_ZY>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] [OT] (signed TLDs)
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:34:04 -0000

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2019, Tony Finch wrote:
> >
> > RFC 7344 did not include bootstrapping, but that was added by RFC 8078.
> > Sadly it's more like a set of hints rather than an actual protocol...
>
> It's just hand waving.  The guys who wrote it know that, but the problem is
> that there was no consensus on how to bootstrap.  It's a hard problem since
> it's sort of inherent that there's nothing other than a DNSSEC signature that
> reliably authenticates a DNSSEC record.

I think if we get more registries copying .cz and/or .ch then some
consensus may emerge but there doesn't seem to be much movement in this
area...

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Mull of Galloway to Mull of Kintyre including the Firth of Clyde and North
Channel: Southeasterly 4 or 5, occasionally 3 at first in Firth of Clyde,
increasing 6 or 7, veering westerly 4 or 5, backing southwesterly 3 or 4
later. Smooth or slight, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, then occasional
rain, becoming fair later. Good, occasionally poor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email