IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Enough DMARC whinging

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Thu, 01 May 2014 23:05 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0390A1A8830 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 16:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 vZhvI7mKZ2d1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 16:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from groups.winserver.com (ntbbs.santronics.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F2E61A882B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 May 2014 16:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=1162; t=1398985540; h=Received:Received: Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject: List-ID; bh=lrbcbNmBNbSG/di2J2AEYGHk2pU=; b=XR1W35hR+tCCAVy6k4Rg 5VLT22KXgZ/d+r3CPjo13beVE07P/qKbSVp8S6NVkAYa9/5LrrMsk+xuAtc8YJRR aoSA1M1946VRmKcg6LRvK/G1We+dg1fta5KOIM5tJwxT1Q+m25cFadnaSefKDHsU leQBDMPISGgy9MQJisSDVFs=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 01 May 2014 19:05:40 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=pass policy=all author.d=isdg.net asl.d=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from hector.wildcatblog.com (opensite.winserver.com [208.247.131.23]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 2094100808.672.740; Thu, 01 May 2014 19:05:39 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=1162; t=1398985444; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=EFAQfQQ pgekTQTRl4Egq+fVRJnfgIV/jsE69bqr8jlo=; b=Xm4nz8TeoAQ+DjRmRG8rPTQ iqAzyLKLw0QIcw9wezZ77xBRR5rSmem6J2MztYnGMtIRG6E2gziH6ElSWwYKFjOJ jXLeHRieUgR8z7anyLBYK9yOceUmo8MHwLgrdA3dHlyDG1OBmXf3n4mIE5TTBx5h b3CmwB7PHt/MfDdyJzt4=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 01 May 2014 19:04:04 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([99.121.4.27]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 2113619625.9.13032; Thu, 01 May 2014 19:04:02 -0400
Message-ID: <5362D344.9070909@isdg.net>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 19:05:40 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Subject: Re: Enough DMARC whinging
References: <CAMm+Lwh0Sc2wtvjEAjOMi4emDzyF4JWmmzYr5QEFcmyoKtkTAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=duU0i1Ppc-nMeWL-ipms4E4b0wpsSRZdLG+2YhujPgH-ZPQ@mail.gmail.c om> <CAMm+LwikJhO5R6UqWx8qUswMptgTw_wF6E6_9Ok=SRYTBChYgA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=duU3scwm=j2BJ6jq4k5zRQPkXOVOR1UscQqZZ8tG5HEZTwQ@mail.gmail.c om> <536113B1.5070309@bbiw.net> <CAMm+LwiXoW3p5uCmML4kAWXnbrrAnSCK9x5U2qeHJdVgR2r_Gg@mail.gmail.com> <E3A7C677B18263C8DF6DD316@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <5362943D.2020907@bluepopcorn.net> <536295E5.3080502@dcrocker.net> <5362B4C6.10904@meetinghouse.net> <20140501215106.D05031512788@rock.dv.isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140501215106.D05031512788@rock.dv.isc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ZaZXsPuOzJY0q4um9Y-C-IqLZlg
Cc: IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 23:05:54 -0000

On 5/1/2014 5:51 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <5362B4C6.10904@meetinghouse.net>, Miles Fidelman writes:
>> Dave Crocker wrote:
>>> On 5/1/2014 1:36 PM, Jim Fenton wrote:
>>>> I'd like to understand the relationship of RFC 4846, which is
>>>> Informational, with RFC 5792/BCP 92 here. The latter gives IESG 5
>>>> options for review of independent submissions for conflicts with the
>>>> IETF standards process, such as:
>>>>
>>>>      5. The IESG has concluded that this document extends an IETF protocol
>>>>         in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be
>>>>         published without IETF review and IESG approval.
>>>
>>> Since DMARC does not extend any existing IETF protocol, how is that
>>> reference useful here?
>>
>> Sure looks to me like DMARC extends both SMTP and DNS.
>
> And DKIM.

Yup. DMARC undoes the signer domain vs author domain "separation 
question" DKIM says it does in the rfc6376 abstract and repeated in 
the introduction:

    DKIM separates the question of the identity of the Signer
    of the message from the purported author of the message.

We never found out what the "question" was.

-- 
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email