Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-17

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Thu, 22 March 2018 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E502C12D88D; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 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, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.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 XcoWSFY0ubjq; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF96F126D05; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1521731839; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=/wpIYyrWjvBLLPvwQdWnqiEp0xfrDkQaLVkEf2Mdk3g=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=AZgCjPGuilyT8oVaVPjovy9iklUToYGtV/4iGsQIkbyv+hHptFDxkWYC9nnHyPlfZv8VcI MnNbhzy+02jKK78GMeObDgKs7MYHCg7gMthoedj6b/79/wAaW4rGhul0i/XJC8RH+dvj4m iyqIYMiFf6NKFKk/KtNGEjkhAPMGtjo=;
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:370:1998:21d2:a616:ae1e:8775] (nat64-64.meeting.ietf.org [31.130.238.100]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <WrPI=gAynXJ7@statler.isode.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:17:18 +0000
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, secdir@ietf.org
References: <152053794569.13938.10396254284390037265@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: uta@ietf.org, draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <5AB3C901.5010009@isode.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:17:21 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
In-Reply-To: <152053794569.13938.10396254284390037265@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/yW-mJQW4XtBuie2hcb8ZQr-Rcng>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-17
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdir/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:17:23 -0000

Hi Phillip,
To followup on the IANA issue from your SecDir review:

On 08/03/2018 19:39, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> 
> Specific issues
> 
> The DNS prefix _smtp-tlsrpt is defined. This is not mentioned in the IANA
> considerations. It is a code point being defined in a protocol that is outside
> the scope of UTA and therefore MUST have an IANA assignment and is a DNS code
> point which is shared space and therefore MUST have an assignment.
> 
> If no IANA registry exists, one should be created.

After looking at this in more details, I think a new registration in the
registry being created by draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf is exactly what you
are asking for. I think registering _smtp-tlsrpt there should be
straightforward. However I don't think this document should be delayed
until after draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf is done. So if
draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf is taking time, the proposed registration can
be moved to draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf itself.

> In general, the approach should be consistent with the following:
> 
> [RFC6763] S. Cheshire and M. Krochmal "DNS-Based Service Discovery" RFC 6763
> DOI 10.17487/RFC6763 February 2013
> 
> It might well be appropriate to create a separate IANA prefix registry
> 'report'. That is probably easier since this prefix does not fit well with the
> existing ones.
> 
> _smtp-tlsrpt._report

I think this is covered by draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf.

Best Regards,
Alexey