IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yam] AD DISCUSS about Section 8 of draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02 - Message Modifications

Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> Tue, 23 August 2011 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: yam@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C7021F8D3A for <yam@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.514
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gIsY24kJs0X9 for <yam@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85EC521F8D39 for <yam@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=presnick@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1314133581; x=1345669581; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc: subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; z=Message-ID:=20<4E541587.50501@qualcomm.com>|Date:=20Tue, =2023=20Aug=202011=2016:03:03=20-0500|From:=20Pete=20Resn ick=20<presnick@qualcomm.com>|User-Agent:=20Mozilla/5.0 =20(Macintosh=3B=20U=3B=20Intel=20Mac=20OS=20X=2010.6=3B =20en-US=3B=20rv:1.9.1.9)=20Gecko/20100630=20Eudora/3.0.4 |MIME-Version:=201.0|To:=20Alexey=20Melnikov=20<alexey.me lnikov@isode.com>|CC:=20S=20Moonesamy=20<sm+ietf@elandsys .com>,=20<yam@ietf.org>|Subject:=20Re:=20[yam]=20AD=20DIS CUSS=20about=20Section=208=20of=20draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409b is-02=0D=0A=20-=20Message=20Modifications|References:=20< 6.2.5.6.2.20110822151213.0aea6018@elandnews.com>=09<4E52E BE4.9010700@dcrocker.net>=09<6.2.5.6.2.20110822212849.08f cabf8@elandnews.com>=20<4E536A4D.4030600@isode.com> |In-Reply-To:=20<4E536A4D.4030600@isode.com> |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" =3B=20format=3Dflowed|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit |X-Originating-IP:=20[172.30.48.1]; bh=5R0HzvtIGnVyEFb1DIuN77RIDs6lJFrEYOGqIuP3rc4=; b=R8XATvC4fuCj2p5cyOK0YxUwpm16jp65VYtjYW8qwMM2ujqW5It3LdBC rl7sUeJNLPOlk1DmH0ulaQnaNE2ue1B/vVcZb5jpW0v8cpH+ACnfYRrqQ jkGfDMiWK81gzbgwdPshpAPftFIW9VLFyrq6cZ3qHuKwLW1TEsS82vGmG 0=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6447"; a="112410818"
Received: from ironmsg03-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.17]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 23 Aug 2011 14:06:19 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,269,1312182000"; d="scan'208";a="101944790"
Received: from nasanexhc05.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.2]) by Ironmsg03-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 23 Aug 2011 14:06:19 -0700
Received: from Macintosh-4.local (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:03:05 -0700
Message-ID: <4E541587.50501@qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 16:03:03 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110822151213.0aea6018@elandnews.com> <4E52EBE4.9010700@dcrocker.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20110822212849.08fcabf8@elandnews.com> <4E536A4D.4030600@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E536A4D.4030600@isode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Cc: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, yam@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [yam] AD DISCUSS about Section 8 of draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02 - Message Modifications
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 21:05:13 -0000

On 8/23/11 3:52 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>> Dave suggested the following text:
>>
>>    "Message modification can affect the validity of an existing message
>>     signature, such as by DKIM [DKIM], PGP [RFC4880], and can render the
>>     signature invalid.  This, in turn, can affect message handling by 
>> later
>>     receivers, such as filtering engines that consider the presence 
>> or absence
>>     of a signature"
>>
>> As an individual comment, the "that consider ..." could be dropped as 
>> the text mentions that validity can affect message handling.
>>
>> Dave and Ned are in favor of including some text and Pete is for 
>> removal.  I would appreciate some more feedback.
>
> I am against removing the text, as it will be a disservice to the 
> community. I am Ok with weakening it and possibly adding examples. 
> Dave's suggestion looks good to me.

And to be clear: I am not "for removal". I am for removal *of the 
current text*, because I think it is reasonable to complain about new 
requirements language in something moving from Draft Standard to 
Standard. But I do not object to Dave's suggested language, and I think 
some kind of language is probably useful.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email