From nobody Fri Jun 1 07:25:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietf.org Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92AB512D875; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 07:25:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Meeting Session Request Tool To: Cc: aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, dmarc@ietf.org, barryleiba@gmail.com, dmarc-chairs@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <152786312552.15177.12221606326917455864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 07:25:25 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 102 X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 14:25:26 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Barry Leiba, a Chair of the dmarc working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance Area Name: Applications and Real-Time Area Session Requester: Barry Leiba Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1 Hour Number of Attendees: 30 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: artarea dcrup dispatch iasa2 cfrg jmap saag cbor People who must be present: Ned Freed Barry Leiba Alexey Melnikov Tim Draegen Resources Requested: Experimental Room Setup (U-Shape and classroom, subject to availability) Special Requests: Chair has to leave Thursday night, so please avoid Friday --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Sun Jun 24 21:25:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietf.org Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66DF31277CC; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:25:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: dmarc@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <152990071639.21712.4631460905677685984@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:25:16 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 04:25:17 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance WG of the IETF. Title : Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol Authors : Kurt Andersen Brandon Long Seth Blank Murray Kucherawy Tim Draegon Filename : draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt Pages : 34 Date : 2018-06-24 Abstract: The Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) protocol allows Internet Mail Handlers to attach assertions of message authentication state to individual messages. As messages traverse ARC-enabled Internet Mail Handlers, additional ARC assertions can be attached to messages to form ordered sets of ARC assertions that represent authentication state along each step of message handling paths. ARC-enabled Internet Mail Handlers can process sets of ARC assertions to inform message disposition decisions, to identify Internet Mail Handlers that might break existing authentication mechanisms, and to convey original authentication state across trust boundaries. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Jun 24 21:27:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B302129385 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 8ZTBzmhgQDmp for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 164611277CC for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id r7-v6so352590edq.10 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZvILVo1af4omRjsRxl9EFZ9QFZbU/md0hRHhI8C8yD4=; b=XNGAMdNT1MGnVYwbNrrJYeJRpjXNEcCu5S7ZaGlNoMSzGKi49Vo/55B7ouCZGDcVh1 SwtQppJu087IGGZaE8FKcw/Crp0g6xgqBgiMT+6g/qIWO/HkIXMZFnw3w5SG1pFeCtti bUs9MVLmfrTwmAE0z/9b12Vfk44+eflifVcp0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZvILVo1af4omRjsRxl9EFZ9QFZbU/md0hRHhI8C8yD4=; b=aq0ykh4x5ROgFq6h9S4tyjGbd3D3WpOGF8o+N5TPiZJQARjEBcaoKV8QTbxlxHaMxX 6rHGLEuksSqIigb3pMwD1woQpUd7qBef1sba10mYADiBh2mpIXTAB3eYrW828xMZ+/Gu zzqiCluZ2zV3SU2GRe3Cc1OqF67A+6qg5rx9hwmedQ2g8A8/AADd5djROOCYw5zseX+T tWZUOiUumUbwE3Q+NRymM/6k42Oo1gJb6zF1xyKuADp4fZ+daSv+InwiZJEDeRcU2g5H xfTHNbX+jJZSDDW9TLWJNVIg2kugapXBiZ4e8/eBiVzDNeAvd/ayeH53/5NHubBhc5qE fCVg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1VV3GwvffVOwevjxA6Pj9AJEmFDOUDz9RTU9bNuxaBO+q/stLa ysdO3YUY1xiDaWdudcbyGP8F6JKGByS4j/PCoDH5m6LzOp0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKis5GfLIcpUBwYuQACMngZJMPYJ9cb+tJKJ431wrYy+AWCpSWL5hdrMJKjAWR4Z3WpWb7hd0Uqepd155hEoD8= X-Received: by 2002:a50:8405:: with SMTP id 5-v6mr9716054edp.125.1529900870315; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Kurt Andersen Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2018 21:27:49 -0700 Message-ID: To: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eac4b9056f6fcdcb" Archived-At: Subject: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 04:27:55 -0000 --000000000000eac4b9056f6fcdcb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. It should be ready for last call - please review with that in mind. Note that the XML was a little wacky in the Implementation Status section. I'll fix that formatting in the next rev. A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt > has been successfully submitted by Kurt Andersen and posted to the > IETF repository. > Name: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol > Revision: 15 > Title: Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol > Document date: 2018-06-24 > Group: dmarc > Pages: 34 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol/ > Htmlized: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15 > Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol > Diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15 --Kurt --000000000000eac4b9056f6fcdcb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. It shoul= d be ready for last call - please review with that in mind. Note that the X= ML was a little wacky in the Implementation Status section. I'll fix th= at formatting in the next rev.

A new version = of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt
has been successfully submitted by Kurt Andersen and posted= to the
IETF repository.
Name: = draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
Revision: 15
Title: Authenticated R= eceived Chain (ARC) Protocol
= Document date: 2018-06-24
Group: dmarc
<= /font>Pages: 34
URL:=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-d= marc-arc-protocol-15.txt
= Status:=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draf= t-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol/
=C2=A0https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc= -protocol-15
Htmlized:=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-= arc-protocol
Diff:=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0https://www= .ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15
--Kurt
--000000000000eac4b9056f6fcdcb-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 04:31:51 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF79130DD1 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 04:31:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 lYs4lPkr23Vr for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 04:31:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60A5130DD4 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 04:31:46 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529926307; b=j3lmrIU6cTeicfE58tDrdi4M1uPiYLUvYB3wB+eAuYIK16FUYma6fimKmIX8YkqHjEeb3Gwtby GdrSTMHBaiP/hxaDNz3tSC+cUl6v6s3jcoZLJd/DcbsoubK3ug6rX7lM1CJASb+f8lIweybsjf Lx7DCpo4VdyfnrjpezE3+MQ=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529926307; bh=KiFGrWauKSdahFmNy9RRyL8vj87KRRPyBotw6YeMKDw=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=TNYBE8BCRCECDCODRfcWTc4Y/rh2n3Em7kxqjXJ5tSOMeZ3z/tdvLQzyfbgN4hnFVy7yEy8MZH EcbIKn5pTPOll4F8tamsU6lkBE6b0x0l5AOqzWmuH9SQz2CNA5FbRK5pYj6Lo224uCoFffRB0a eLG7zt9mUEaAOS2g7KfyhTI=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=JtXjCqX/ZmZOE+DHrWqWrzLq3HD7BGONs0qS3BsdZWE=; b=g fX2Myfbjz6V2MFiXTpsZ5NY2NVWHm/6g/JVRLSXFiRspUqf7a2mXOmN6fuVHoOBX3UMPlEpjwVART KTlq5pWAe8Za4wIz6LoLB0uJMYMvoD6+c8Wtn2LWikSMOARJLo409n1xB4Hys0EOx4PK1QvEbI7or lLj71XN9bC8P+fPU=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) from_AS 51561 by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fXPii-0002zT-NC for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 11:31:44 +0000 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 12:31:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 11:31:50 -0000 On 06/25/2018 05:27 AM, Kurt Andersen wrote: > I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. Section 4.1.3 ARC-Seal (AS) Second bullet point: "Section Section 5.1.1" - reads oddly in the text version. It's more clear in the html version, where the second "Section" is part of a link. This applies in multiple places Fifth bullet point: "Note especially that the DKIM "h" header is NOT"... s/header/tag ? + this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for AS mean that a common parse routine for the three header types cannot be used. Did I miss the discussion introducing the requirement? + 5.1.1 has no further information... perhaps a whole bunch of info was dropped? -- Cheers, Jeremy From nobody Mon Jun 25 07:08:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92D9F130ED6 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.609 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailforce.net header.b=JCYsXB39; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=DfVs+ba3 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 JRJ4ABV_AA69 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 07:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AEA7130DF1 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 07:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D6B121B76; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:07:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:07:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailforce.net; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=waHkhmKG2vaKLsWjO eeqvynFTgDDOamTuQ9gS1jn5Hs=; b=JCYsXB39YmlhgI1EWA5K2FYlCJTn0jJzp x4VUrWBz4Kc09a8h85omFRzFrLcNmrhTCEX2PAcy9VcRYrCq/QkM0woBqbqKV527 X+lQLtxGOpqeKmTBsfoMyLMyXYtvD8QQdxRaw0hiYwYyeJFV5+ugSdAH6NIT2hK0 lZrfLeoXdNgt+Z8QYa8KfJrErwC0NDSYMtSdrz23jJeC9zlDHa0X7nmkeuDgp1Pg uq1p81Rdrt0aGMH6dCdYKehfgYlh50IecBMlpcUGQBR23cZvT+o+zNMQ8mtqJNf8 rmnHfmP/kwkevXcD4K37DJaOHxRE6f3MKz+WP4/qs0rQrr82SEGTQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=waHkhm KG2vaKLsWjOeeqvynFTgDDOamTuQ9gS1jn5Hs=; b=DfVs+ba36PLVQa6W/GDZgv PvkPufXuCe7Xj1wl4f/VLi9SHd8QSJNI19YwGIi3b+eVyNJ19uRRLPXOGRVAIr1l aXfGNYK2V4SPt9tVgfsDRLu3YP//LC4J1gmcudnLDNDcsJ6VqfjUU1zv7KSqxzKr T0vcx9hiag8ujxLvz40xVPTsGg6jWNEVbrMHCVxlFMLpTo9KJu5XVdaJx+J2LJUf 7YYdRDr1pN187+NPxgvywJjBTWhJgZj58+lyenJNkyS1APV74JGVtzT+xv4sLX5Y fqGvcPkUutQUiKoQFdOnZfvOlyiJGnJ5XwSD1o2J3GLc7mpA+L7ZOqkbdBL1R0Yg == X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-A158D1EB-50D4-443B-8EB8-BFAA036AE545 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" From: Stan Kalisch Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:07:46 -0400 To: Kurt Andersen Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:08:02 -0000 --Apple-Mail-A158D1EB-50D4-443B-8EB8-BFAA036AE545 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Jun 25, 2018, at 12:27 AM, Kurt Andersen wrote: >=20 > I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. Nit: Tim's last name seems to be morphing into a dragon. Stan > It should be ready for last call - please review with that in mind. Note t= hat the XML was a little wacky in the Implementation Status section. I'll fi= x that formatting in the next rev. >=20 >> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Kurt Andersen and posted to the >> IETF repository. >> Name: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol >> Revision: 15 >> Title: Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol >> Document date: 2018-06-24 >> Group: dmarc >> Pages: 34 >> URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc= -protocol-15.txt >> Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-pro= tocol/ >> Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol= -15 >> Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-ar= c-protocol >> Diff: https://www..ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-dmarc-arc= -protocol-15 >=20 > --Kurt > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc --Apple-Mail-A158D1EB-50D4-443B-8EB8-BFAA036AE545 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Jun 25, 2018, at 12:= 27 AM, Kurt Andersen <kurta@drkurt.co= m> wrote:

I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol.

Nit:  Tim's last name seems to be morphing into a dragon.

Stan

It should be ready for last call - please review= with that in mind. Note that the XML was a little wacky in the Implementati= on Status section. I'll fix that formatting in the next rev.

<= div>
A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt
<= /font>has been successfully submitted by= Kurt Andersen and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
Revision: 15
Title: Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol
Document date: 2018-06-24
Group: dmarc
Pages: 34
URL: &= nbsp;          h= ttps://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15.txt
= Status:   &nbs= p;     = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol/
Htmlized:   &nbs= p;   https://= tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-15
Htmlized:       https://datatracker= .ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
Diff:        =    https://www..ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-dmarc-ar= c-protocol-15

--Kurt
____________________= ___________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mai= lman/listinfo/dmarc
= --Apple-Mail-A158D1EB-50D4-443B-8EB8-BFAA036AE545-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:10:43 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2759B130DFE for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 s-VyUZNYtifX for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C13F2130DD9 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id c17-v6so5646052eds.11 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=PKPuFlG3lAeZrEgV4blN5gLdZ5wy7uNg4/qD/Qc55F4=; b=Og+dO0RaU81nmaJFsH4bxP3KP5U6xfYVUwjNVFEMngZ7L8h2ecDA0fmxOHR0sd7Grv vwDlgjhopOu2fWWFen0dAgAmu3XLXNSjd9RzclaFU6stYT3fKFIOoS8IFZwfxCqstFKM brKTmpI0ypfRcpGcSq6PrRY9blEW49uw1Hg6I= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PKPuFlG3lAeZrEgV4blN5gLdZ5wy7uNg4/qD/Qc55F4=; b=Z3jndBddmIvPp9m0qVp30c82S+WUOW/h/S/yQ3LkvUohdffvVkH0bnn7At2LaSsPam lXBiq9HEOpmwbkeuJ0YT5okidLYUwILkP1RK5OB80kzokmG5k/5oTiWSuVjlRNr1EAqo elvaSzu49M2/iqKm/xojypH7SyWBm1p5z9VTPHER69d/Inqimc02vUeOuUM5etHU/lDP A1JXL3h3rptclhY8HQwvT+ZNGsyp7Vaj/hpmFKZ4xZNzEKz/hwrEw1usHB1W8sNhkXQA NRU2u3kgwWaNv1+O5oYWaJtJrG1PQVsilqSBQj8EHarj/FgJmpbYhWoD1JX7hX+HeBjc 1XWg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E36GzOrAGIM7W3PEjpnKEtTKpwbBRmKDlS5h9R4pI5cgjLzwozW 6aaxDy/gqPY2gLNpta8MDPO2x/JH9hDVBSZ3hfVSLbzf X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKK1xAuxnTrVJI7qik2E0CcUWb00UAjuqQ2HaX1ncQ2p21Uq5Df+yO4XoA1wWSFtkX3E8dkStzoRAZIoDTk8OnY= X-Received: by 2002:a50:ec19:: with SMTP id g25-v6mr11815341edr.242.1529939436985; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kurta@drkurt.com Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:10:36 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: g3hg0JRMNY2tcJ1gtOkuSTvS4W0 Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ab7206056f78c83a" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:10:41 -0000 --000000000000ab7206056f78c83a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 4:31 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/25/2018 05:27 AM, Kurt Andersen wrote: > > I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. > > Section 4.1.3 ARC-Seal (AS) > > Second bullet point: > "Section Section 5.1.1" > - reads oddly in the text version. It's more clear in the > html version, where the second "Section" is part of a link. > This applies in multiple places > Looks like this was accidentally introduced in the editing process along the way. Will be cleaned up. Thanks for catching it. > Fifth bullet point: > "Note especially that the DKIM "h" header is NOT"... > > s/header/tag ? > Yes > + this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for > AS mean that a common parse routine for the three > header types cannot be used. Did I miss the discussion > introducing the requirement? > The 'h' tag was never defined for the AS header. > + 5.1.1 has no further information... perhaps a whole > bunch of info was dropped? > I see text in both html and txt versions in section 5.1.1 in my locally processed version. Will check the IETF tools version. --Kurt --000000000000ab7206056f78c83a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 25, 2018 at 4:31 AM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> w= rote:
On 06/25/2018 05:2= 7 AM, Kurt Andersen wrote:
> I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol.

Section 4.1.3 ARC-Seal (AS)

Second bullet point:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Section Section 5.1.1"
=C2=A0 =C2=A0- reads oddly in the text version.=C2=A0 It's more clear i= n the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0html version, where the second "Section" is p= art of a link.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0This applies in multiple places
Looks like this was accidentally introduced in the editing pro= cess along the way. Will be cleaned up. Thanks for catching it.
= =C2=A0
Fifth bullet point:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Note especially that the DKIM "h" header is NO= T"...

s/header/tag ?

Yes
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0+ this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0AS mean that a common parse routine for the three
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0header types cannot be used.=C2=A0 Did I miss the discu= ssion
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0introducing the requirement?

<= /div>
The 'h' tag was never defined for the AS header.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0+ 5.1.1 has no further information... perhaps a whole
bunch of info was dropped?

I see text i= n both html and txt versions in section 5.1.1 in my locally processed versi= on. Will check the IETF tools version.

--Kurt

--000000000000ab7206056f78c83a-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:16:40 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4668A130EA5 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 IFXNRXWq9RbN for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FD61130DD9 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:16:36 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529939796; b=QcfaRtCkLd+qLEESwhHXonPR8HD1XZ8LxqaUShqFfU1hrOedpCPl2jUzSHHb3pvzfk+Z8lI5Tq i9ppCjHvOd/DstprlkdfV6H6o9ODWjbsDMuobGU8TjDCu4kwtuZph8zpeTwrDMCfH/9TIlydgZ 3fGLA2AlTkQ+YJbUvEUg+wo=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529939796; bh=V1OqzqbjiZ201NomV29SjyRZt9uDp4RGtqDmjjMNSgc=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=c0yQxmOlvqVxDna3RK7q4H6QvTCbxgBzO2DyIb3q+qpFlOQ/yMV7a60R6JLRwmKzqVvL1dG1ND +m/6Ugc16ycPqblXruvmBa7DgpLlEawDtgqeNoFMZQ7AlpVGka3Qa+eQVXb/rl2oTugBAOR4LK hqMODkvj9hiuTrxj84e5qGw=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Ra3Mo4usutEc7afbH0WnHop4I8lcJNH2YtpnCk9Sxc8=; b=z 2guKOlkNN5JI36dGPFu4EAcEAZjRY1bfevQGOxr6uScFk7XdG7MvsoL0cR+nK0nTpb93Qyl4Josi1 W1QGjfZWE0zNwKs8FPF1SzlMMDy5eKY2o8eNxhyr6refQLi415LfI/SwsQP+pv2i9eAXQKJPf2fwi 9NdHMh2oxU2yxThc=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) from_AS 51561 by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fXTEI-0000yU-8p for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:16:34 +0000 References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> To: "dmarc@ietf.org" From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:16:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:16:38 -0000 On 06/25/2018 04:10 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: >> + this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for >> AS mean that a common parse routine for the three >> header types cannot be used. Did I miss the discussion >> introducing the requirement? >> > > The 'h' tag was never defined for the AS header. Indeed, but there was no requirement to check for one either. -- Cheers, Jeremy From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:17:13 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6E7130EA5 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 jHWvLO1Rbn34 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA68130DFE for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id r7-v6so1498010edq.10 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4yV1olZFml3Z2TznJkwUSI4p6Ws1uVy3TiQFh9PvEPc=; b=NQGcF+/buoJ0PCAAQwPNPoYm3idU9N+ATnDxBpuj/lvrD2+tKRj0YsM4LX18dQxv6J LbOj1kHc2ulUfDhXzAZmU33MovTlozmR1GUEjJM68O28wHRWSCknaT6OJANxrAGLUDps U/0n9XJNyN4w5NkbcJRQSUVXmb+TGR3+Kgzes= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4yV1olZFml3Z2TznJkwUSI4p6Ws1uVy3TiQFh9PvEPc=; b=eLEvmfWX/uJd+wOyHCocK8XxdThMgCx3y5HVo+ouCrrAm/AVTGS567j3p6d5nNkPcQ +YE4q6oZI8Iacz2pMF6fZUVMdY5kuzU2JkW0t/8cscT3ptuwdbU/u+HgH+k/AcGx3NYT 1TqxVOUBP9as+x5vsblUHQfe1lnNjNXhcsLVEMUIPT4VfD5EwR6+nG34C/G5jfDbw+q4 LcpRkAow6tNayQ9fbirbUw9LXODv1FrEF39HRj2Ur5DUVTO6qcEaplnCuCC0csPovS0Q XQQrw3GbpPWMGDu2JTSZazrqizL2eVbeMci3h6lVHYCVXQoCEZnLANQBoJDtMZlwgyd0 FtUQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2SnL0PWrHatjGSxhq4SbMHfBimaWdNSQCOHNabish0W0bsL3xt rUEWLfXYtgCZfxfRsGrSW1kbYE4Cmauvfh7peuQEhPXk X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIwkv9hErUYtpEQRo4v9BfWwChTPBKJzWavyeUGALlNWvmAef/wSZfK2vOF+WGRd8Opk+EBP3ULNs6j/iC9bAM= X-Received: by 2002:a50:a3c7:: with SMTP id t7-v6mr11759201edb.227.1529939828022; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Kurt Andersen Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:17:07 -0700 Message-ID: To: Stan Kalisch Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fa3454056f78dfd1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:17:12 -0000 --000000000000fa3454056f78dfd1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Stan Kalisch wrote: > > On Jun 25, 2018, at 12:27 AM, Kurt Andersen wrote: > > I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. > > > Nit: Tim's last name seems to be morphing into a dragon. > Fixed. You'd think I would get that right given the spelling of my own last name :-/ Apologies to Tim. --Kurt --000000000000fa3454056f78dfd1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 25, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Stan Kalisch <stan@glyphein.mailfor= ce.net> wrote:

On Jun 25, 2018, at 12:27 AM, Ku= rt Andersen <kurta= @drkurt.com> wrote:

I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol.
<= /blockquote>

Nit: =C2=A0Tim's last name seems to b= e morphing into a dragon.

Fixed. You&= #39;d think I would get that right given the spelling of my own last name := -/ Apologies to Tim.

--Kurt=C2=A0

<= /div>
--000000000000fa3454056f78dfd1-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:19:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F2B130EBC for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 6cpBYiqeJsOn for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EAE5130ED2 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id m15-v6so3434943edr.7 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=VJ7Na13Sd5TNIAp/5alLCQ5tAXkO+aeDPd9aJN50NC0=; b=SMuXUP3wWex+BtVxG98jPROPMzZHboo/TwEzm1kaGgkpLbBeRTZt6k8NAUqx4M2QuZ pLwdQa/NKPMn0GtNLdXOLyg13iZTa4qHysRdptcR+L1dTkUebfY1wI6OAcBDunWEDF4B kkDMtPa7HiRcFI65z6BLa+iX9CIC6F3B5diyk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VJ7Na13Sd5TNIAp/5alLCQ5tAXkO+aeDPd9aJN50NC0=; b=Ih5ufEHf0sNnO5Qq7fP4NOfrrJL1pmk4jKszKsvHPJ/jTg6rnariOxjV/IVoBUZIcr npmep6IFt8iCKIkZ1HEYQTXSi/d9AFeywCuu0emWPORWaqSgy7p7A4wqxacqwgeHw+h/ cdB/AHJj3Qh9WQdPy1XWuy8lmo7YWYBFBnO8OoAEbS20uPgOhSt1JWKYw0xAV2PhkvUI VuAPihkenQd+YdfqhjFQltu+Nr7HE8/0aHJ63Q7ydYnVqTJ/MOmJQ3ivcqmIjOrjApUQ PlcL0SUk1mrmyZ2xhhiP8K2MpSu6snjqyTmUjlHwZYT2ZYBgrVpdWiI6EL/y+ndRQRXE JtEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1xLUUg5R/ypMmfX/cngWNnzNvacSMqmNtTEgZqmO+U1CgPHTrG zZ9dFZ4ghgg1UVpCILPH4wo+9C2V1YKOSKeIdFAeYocc X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIweM4h1ykyO5m0Z3M+3SrwXzU8RIBDUVFgTy+Q3vr4e2OXAsVyb5R5M6aBweyEG+iMZ/K7ZrlWySKR466w44s= X-Received: by 2002:a50:a3c7:: with SMTP id t7-v6mr11764798edb.227.1529939922912; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kurta@drkurt.com Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:18:42 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vbmTGg-fSCldOlNrStoyeC-vZ0w Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a20cbf056f78e5f1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:18:50 -0000 --000000000000a20cbf056f78e5f1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/25/2018 04:10 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > >> + this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for > >> AS mean that a common parse routine for the three > >> header types cannot be used. Did I miss the discussion > >> introducing the requirement? > >> > > > > The 'h' tag was never defined for the AS header. > > Indeed, but there was no requirement to check for one either. Correct - this was a clarification that has been added. If people find it objectionable we can take it back out. What would your parser do if it found an "h" tag in the header? Just ignore it or override the implicit "h" that is defined for AS? --Kurt --000000000000a20cbf056f78e5f1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> w= rote:
On 06/25/2018 04:1= 0 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 + this (new?) requirement to check on h-tags for
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 AS mean that a common parse routine for the th= ree
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 header types cannot be used.=C2=A0 Did I miss = the discussion
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 introducing the requirement?
>>
>
> The 'h' tag was never defined for the AS header.

Indeed, but there was no requirement to check for one either.

Correct - this was a clarification that has been = added. If people find it objectionable we can take it back out. What would = your parser do if it found an "h" tag in the header? Just ignore = it or override the implicit "h" that is defined for AS?

--Kurt=C2=A0
--000000000000a20cbf056f78e5f1-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:30:50 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 198E9130E05 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:30:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 u0BAswT9sstD for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:30:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26AF4130DD9 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:30:46 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529940646; b=FS+DkgXNb1V1JgQ6m0yItyZUJQt45ebAKbYUE+ojLH2gtufYPttuKlWaQYig29W6QgxnDbBnGD eseiXQdYgRMtctxh70vT4DUAkd6hYT/UZ3uEXC4QEqSSAaILxQ2QYL6owoVSiogaim+0KqJDLg YYEOxesWwCsGR+XKcbTY/cs=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529940646; bh=fqIwHtSpQg/xaamBXzJQRmdLhgR2FiAr2W9Z2XqMTZI=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=dBLYYQtl3cbtQRZkBLE9wcLbl+ggK5BZ4+GbLRzJrvFNoWbuPWHItpfMdE62+u/Me7Di+3I4zP KWHczV/v2umdvkSf64Z9Rovh5SQX6ucbttGkfMpIQUvhnZclp0laM5xiFfOZkrTc2Os+vGoaqb o5R9mO96hUD0oJcrO3/0XGc=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fqIwHtSpQg/xaamBXzJQRmdLhgR2FiAr2W9Z2XqMTZI=; b=V xIMhnpyMi+rqrPmyD+3IY1YmECrgGI0XsWNMlKeorYkXiLN0aiQWPjYkw/7l8RX94SCVlGO8mkMh7 HZqJ/v5TczcQT9/5OMJwKBm2lbr378MskI1xYPsIT8JlTYx3APw43tN2Kk51fZvOxU8qOpUZC4vyj BlopRrrF34bq1g2k=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) from_AS 51561 by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fXTS0-0001Ls-Ea for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:30:44 +0000 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:30:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:30:49 -0000 On 06/25/2018 04:18 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > Correct - this was a clarification that has been added. If people find it > objectionable we can take it back out. What would your parser do if it > found an "h" tag in the header? Just ignore it or override the implicit "h" > that is defined for AS? Just ignore it. -J From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:38:59 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BCA130DCE for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 j7AO90iMvqj0 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x535.google.com (mail-ed1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::535]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 713A0130E03 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x535.google.com with SMTP id c1-v6so5685264edt.2 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=RjLBXbrIX8Q14H1uYFlZDux/PbyhkG0pnCz9Q1pNDtg=; b=Enw7rkiBnCiYJHhb5J6VLSr2SHwpS/ZQXCrqJuE9XNhKGGR25iTDOKeQLJobtCLRPV Jx6uIJIAgsciJAe2zahD5eYS8kdOlZwAG0ryOBLyU+ze/gvzhqRDIuwUFlnIfhKnhpge hFo8Jsusd+o3FSounPgZjdD9msfRWOE6X1HvE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RjLBXbrIX8Q14H1uYFlZDux/PbyhkG0pnCz9Q1pNDtg=; b=GHahDcbiarZAi7tch7N8THRty+QoGmTO8CAs07WL37TEENG865BcT74CLe4C/XqtiV CI51HU1id707rsXJC6ml9Tu5BIN6lgpv5xSGAqC2+dOG4MlIcRIBsKJLE8HJ76w+C8tq MYAs28GIparXwxCKHm+8vNiFga9U2cT7w7i47LsCwRJsFSQqb5F2R8Pfx3u2ZXymIGul gQkLbIstjOEPpDDIuFNIRHShKvp/bO+xxjVXpc8bzfCrJg6ff+SLYqzu7nUjpXgCk/qL M0+TjSHAi+V0X3r4pCIgxVADiPkctwNeNymKK7t68nevI0ZFf4RZ3dJYmOxh+betgMxw darQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1n/kf4yJx4FD7BKw+mZED4sgIu+vLCOnLU+XKKqzDdX8VA35qL DtPxbY948Uxaag2RzoeCPBq7SQLgRfFqLqI/OByY/K+W X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKINQQ8hgztX5GTW1zC0MsK195V3VUDQE+1QMqzb7l4nmtKoL6ZGheb8SaxP8NiV88Az8Wa4681FsFooRSLByEA= X-Received: by 2002:a50:b942:: with SMTP id m60-v6mr11900052ede.20.1529941133918; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kurta@drkurt.com Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:38:53 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VVtvzPqLYBzB-Bv5NHoVAnl05cg Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d0924f056f792ddb" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:38:58 -0000 --000000000000d0924f056f792ddb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/25/2018 04:18 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > > Correct - this was a clarification that has been added. If people find it > > objectionable we can take it back out. What would your parser do if it > > found an "h" tag in the header? Just ignore it or override the implicit > "h" > > that is defined for AS? > > Just ignore it That's the right approach, but the ambiguity of what a validator might do is why we thought it best to be explicit. I guess that we could drop the illegality of an "h" tag and just specify that it MUST be ignored instead. Opinions from any other implementations? --Kurt --000000000000d0924f056f792ddb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> w= rote:
On 06/25/2018 04:1= 8 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> Correct - this was a clarification that has been added. If people find= it
> objectionable we can take it back out. What would your parser do if it=
> found an "h" tag in the header? Just ignore it or override t= he implicit "h"
> that is defined for AS?

Just ignore it

That's the right = approach, but the ambiguity of what a validator might do is why we thought = it best to be explicit. I guess that we could drop the illegality of an &qu= ot;h" tag and just specify that it MUST be ignored instead. Opinions f= rom any other implementations?

--Kurt=C2=A0
<= /div>
--000000000000d0924f056f792ddb-- From nobody Mon Jun 25 08:45:06 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC4C130E20 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:45:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 yaCH5y2I_OTD for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl0-x236.google.com (mail-pl0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8F3D130E05 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl0-x236.google.com with SMTP id t6-v6so1650559plo.7 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:45:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WeA58DabDvQX0hfspaUR2qWk57Z/tHlcXWyflzihu+4=; b=Qw5Usy+RM1vOuoUlZTBSa8pDRBUSH1jCVJx78Gy9VoOoc/deCvHnKSL+YpGVnW9VFJ 3hJDO+DVHbLYolb5pDTAmK4Q99UWBA865Lkwb3ckpxUw+iwsb/r5NZL+oC/k2zKLrJ/O AcZ4O13keuqBauy2zOo9N0yw8dbxTJbB1622wu1ab3lusBKvBhm2zl0wh7IFl1WiclIt nXjNUrWLu1AqZUL1oqpa8zqx2uqghmzdILPMKZv8pOOEypjCEI8kPE6OUZWfCz86q1V4 FHlL+ObTBW3t1eC1KFGB7EGB7Gpi64rd1VnXp48Z3Hq4tOxxZqdVjovgiZqzf1Zw2Lw9 31cg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WeA58DabDvQX0hfspaUR2qWk57Z/tHlcXWyflzihu+4=; b=KmVHCp3JkxVmT5QkuwPXc6B3UW8UsLEMJM6yA5VkfwH2VOuNuLO+QlUQ93SmpA4DPw Exe49fP+5UhcYLY+JQBsSPeYb5urFbKX0hfEGli0E9QPdVjhpNOxMSOJeLwlTwY3zY18 CWh0ff4F4HZvBebBXJorB4V/TpNrfbf2sGFtZvPIYhgqAweOGiW4Kssy6mex/LajPmI1 kbHsuuKDfg6z3o1xZrYzpZZRjDHjYQrOXs4wJd+NXVLqXX2USUgDFx0qQP7IUd0NUVdC aBvd5q8ErzZMjK6DVX3X5UplwdftAhsfvcdlJBa0Za73UnDAIrVRF38bp0vBPbtCTgmV ztbw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E25IksLHSM5EmSamr6qflqoo47/c7w8JTxQQY6q+Q8Q4fy7iRQ0 2U5VTmjX+FTRkWmVMVJLCnD7KN0g X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLbkOnZI4MPPfNgQETEkrQ/XvUWX1lLAX1ItKQyieT1UOhEAtvD4mNKCfTpVIxUvSAvmvgFRw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:3343:: with SMTP id a61-v6mr12799322plc.241.1529941500821; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [76.218.8.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a20-v6sm22864201pfo.55.2018.06.25.08.44.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:44:59 -0700 (PDT) To: "Kurt Andersen (b)" , Jeremy Harris Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> From: Dave Crocker Message-ID: <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 05:44:58 -1000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:45:05 -0000 On 6/25/2018 5:38 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > That's the right approach, but the ambiguity of what a validator might > do is why we thought it best to be explicit. Yup. Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this information' demonstrates NON-standardization. If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way of knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean interpretation of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- then it isn't a standard. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nobody Mon Jun 25 09:03:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE902130EA9 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:03:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 fuKJaicdV060 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:03:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E438E130DCE for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:03:20 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529942601; b=dNrQOhMVZDq1Pq/109Ad+7WtG9vT+5886Ft0R1RwMXHyLPsoaPvGyP8UatV8AgHdrTUxN6yKUH 7hYBh9KhsvfOl2joVznZQpwbvvjRGTu16h7FtWN+aNCIW1PfxQ8+JBg3U6OIWNmZbhw6NR5MIO +u6ElYQX6tmP0FaKwWgw6Uk=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1529942601; bh=Zn2fKm+2NErVO3fedNhjOwtnGVmvkpeABIyi9ExIEgQ=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=O0aUjTNvzBhz+a1guDw8UXNv1fMqUDmW6RZzpfeun0TbM9aZjZy28zRo3aCsH9pijD2TCs6NjJ 8tP45Z4kSzymSSADW12Uvgq6510xyXP6dEH/vDMJVnhYmE9SRjFfunUtfK8s/Gy/VVdKucRL+2 zr/1Jn7UOe7kRL7aohm3EG8=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=u4zcU1n0d7LsjyYML0c9E2+aKwLfurjvKLd84m8spT8=; b=x UQwhDqKXXgZn2ylDtXtSIGb+myeIdOLjvp7V1OmX4lgZ3WgdA+fH288fS8+apMn2No09v6hgshhIu M9xGRdWCJBEZ7KjIpWZ78k2zHIOCsJ3A3JI/3YY8n9r3ZHMSGRgRS0LqTCj3ILQxs2IyEkx7zfXmN b3vEw5FmvxNhbMsU=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.client-ip=2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from [2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94] (helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fXTxW-0002Ge-50 for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:03:18 +0000 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 17:03:16 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [2a00:b900:109e:0:855c:1404:1b9d:3a94] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:03:23 -0000 On 06/25/2018 04:44 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 6/25/2018 5:38 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: >> That's the right approach, but the ambiguity of what a validator might >> do is why we thought it best to be explicit. > > > Yup. > > Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this > information' demonstrates NON-standardization. > > If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way of > knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean interpretation > of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- then it > isn't a standard. On that view, the spec should be either "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, invalidates the ARC set" or "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, MUST be ignored". -- Cheers, Jeremy From nobody Mon Jun 25 09:09:32 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330BB130EFF for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 6dcHYNzypT2w for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x231.google.com (mail-ot0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FD1F130ECB for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x231.google.com with SMTP id i17-v6so4787285otl.1 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=u9ffKr7vrSHFd0rRyIM9KCjWTJUlk5TIJCv0S5rZBC4=; b=sG1SoCo/rz/2F0Lt1/KsIzexNf8R2HF+CbI3qbKsAENwmpGYOd4ieEAqfT14vRiIJw dzhjrB/aKn1BUSsGOB6DKY4v1ALGbN4ORbKJ2cwv+Vd+N5+cNHSoBWfZXNZvuPFzemue 4j9g4FUkQEzukE4BVuy1r1XORggvU2u094WQ3E85g/yMN75qmx9kxe3X17HS9pq0Mwee rGXoh1tmLO9tYqpu7/y1IV3nNUx3DsBD8wlducz24l2NDk8ADvaVXfMVzhvl2hbZnVMD YmfKXXW+Eb2WDHucRMTFOkj4llskyP7CbeyjECuJEdPZMIy7aJsz/UgSxBoKOcrKSSfL 5l1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=u9ffKr7vrSHFd0rRyIM9KCjWTJUlk5TIJCv0S5rZBC4=; b=Sodtbz4ufia9vPA/RLL8IV/Sier7VPnOYAxU7Z/Id8N/W13qkJYpHP/RIOVE0ubo3f 2gh9C/Go/emhuG4vRtrtfx26k1eCfO1wKc6/6x89ROxkVqlLbo9LnkaTybJsGEJ8EhuA CBXGFC8Riqq+MrigCkpC8Scm2vKCnPgdam5Hv+j9E7+iPbvxNqukQm1BfLAhigYnkiUY 6gtjWU/3wZKpzuLR3+fAntdYD/ZQYEHH8E7TZ625PPX7Qv7BPMydaHHngivS4MZUwT1u KKio4ky9nRXQcD06yioUp949rb+wiLJlBj/lEQynwxARNZkRcpqMRMH1FwhaUXMI6grr Xkqg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0DhKe+mxb1pG6L1+m2ZIbhU2C2A/5ISRN879lREgeK8BWHIHGV A/Ph4ZxxGT7EW7KXdXxtWVxsFI1b X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeaPv71Hqq6AlN8rFlHc+TV+fTwCdjwohuuwObXopRgntu9Hl2JVpN+6pDpWzkQ24YLjRIZDA== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6155:: with SMTP id c21-v6mr8195793otk.198.1529942954230; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [76.218.8.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j65-v6sm7690511otc.21.2018.06.25.09.09.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:09:12 -0700 (PDT) To: Jeremy Harris , dmarc@ietf.org References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> From: Dave Crocker Message-ID: <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 06:09:11 -1000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:09:31 -0000 On 6/25/2018 6:03 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/25/2018 04:44 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: >> If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way of >> knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean interpretation >> of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- then it >> isn't a standard. > > On that view, the spec should be either > > "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, > invalidates the ARC set" > > or > > "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, > MUST be ignored". While there are some operational environments where one of these two choices really is appropriate -- the need for extremely rigorous control over the entire range of operational choice is... extreme -- this isn't one of them. There's a difference between 'all information must be defined' and 'all information must be defined here'. Your choices match the latter. The former is adequate here. Just because information isn't defined in /this/ document and just because the receiver doesn't understand the information, does not mean its presence is unacceptable. The most common example of this truth is enhancements defined later, while continued operation by older implementations is still desired. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nobody Mon Jun 25 10:31:52 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C242C130E13 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 oGUCABQwWWYj for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52a.google.com (mail-ed1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 080B1130DDA for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id c17-v6so5915456eds.11 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=C3xnSNZvtAP6/DlylvS59rqZik7yq1+PPkHuj/FNemo=; b=DP7YwB+F3F6dtczHk9yrVcudTEe/sHJlQbBZyN+iWanrgkydNDVNtlcvV/EQxylL9X xPwTwot8EXhBnehI5GMZjpVYWyzRGnwXjKFGwA5JDIWTpBnmaqp64JHaJP7I2/EzEmQk LF6/2Hrxs/vq6s3WrtIX7Rw4dDdTd/UNF3GKE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=C3xnSNZvtAP6/DlylvS59rqZik7yq1+PPkHuj/FNemo=; b=haQqxTXWj2tbgpm0lHT63m1cvJVTCnEO6qJp7MpEMiKZR9wyjSdlmYgDGR+64pvVaU gGiU+yQ7+BbScLpb4CEA7/AjzkYMIepxJGgAEczvVo60RL84H8NytGFaRnM2xxKLs80Y vGUl2vU8B9QaOx4hPfKxc24j6BtI3JKq/d6A8w0ezzWAO9qEJJzUBLryUCPB+k/aVkmU kHtj8D9Dr2TK7D81H0d8iUbHvQccDU1MgvJFT81kVHuZQtcd4E4vg0obL9ok8F21MUme yx+sbKNgWfuG+p8+nsNEewN8RUElMTQEhCcrVC6vD1InS9Ai+Wu+7+7c3SJPXKht4cR7 UmHA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0bghyyLR/Y2fzlKR9AFFRWXUJ9yvKcYX5pWiuFbGlXLs0foLbV KRcxF7+8230lXl3jOHbwxri91mL/oq/2E7TM6w6NEQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKI92cmQernxvNQkgVfZZXxenCLA3+8TL62oUwBIcBk86Ge9fi/Z3OBrE8jPZmj5CGJQIn/ifTn/Agj+BrAs+2U= X-Received: by 2002:a50:8a02:: with SMTP id i2-v6mr12508494edi.89.1529947907456; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Kurt Andersen Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:31:46 -0700 Message-ID: To: ARC Discussion , "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008c92c3056f7ac1de" Archived-At: Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Early head's up: Interop testing/validation 2018-10-12 X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 17:31:51 -0000 --0000000000008c92c3056f7ac1de Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" We are in the early planning phases for another in-person interop day on Friday, 2018-10-12 (the Friday following the Brooklyn M3AAWG meeting). For people attending in person, the meeting will be hosted at the Empire State Building. More details will be forthcoming, but if you are coming to the M3AAWG meeting, please plan to stay for Friday's interop. You can express your interest (or not) at http://bit.ly/arc-09-interest --Kurt Andersen --0000000000008c92c3056f7ac1de Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We are in the early planning phases for another in-person = interop day on Friday, 2018-10-12 (the Friday following the Brooklyn M3AAWG= meeting). For people attending in person, the meeting will be hosted at th= e Empire State Building.=C2=A0

More details will be fort= hcoming, but if you are coming to the M3AAWG meeting, please plan to stay f= or Friday's interop.

You can express your inte= rest (or not) at=C2=A0http://bit.= ly/arc-09-interest

--Kurt Andersen
--0000000000008c92c3056f7ac1de-- From nobody Wed Jun 27 12:52:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F135130E1A for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 12:52:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 97w0t_GADX4J for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 12:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81EBB130E14 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 12:52:12 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1530129133; b=BsGUVxo2UgksSLd8IWp+7cXVKi8+LnT2c60LPfGOQ/YU+LZgwLTZWadftXyMu2zUcl/pfGjHfI vwGUM0to4g3zhVQitYlFYN7O34UjB5zrXxHK0Lwf1Ju2quSAe3L6dOsGY97+g147Lj+Adjkn3O 86T2RZBkXy4lw8mQGK6bwM0=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=pass (vgate18.wizint.net) smtp.client-ip=2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1530129133; bh=NfDF+mAV7zfpHj/rR91a5eqCUiuHzpR1RPM30fxEKM8=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=cc+HbNlCTWj/cLWkUxiajWoBC0PhOduAEyFKN/sPvYAhB3dW31JpM2reiAZ/X5ZC/s8R+fp1kO 9xa4JN1jZClIbCqH66uSnDEqWc4HEid7vi0pyrtCHYBbVVFeaBGEwgTp4aBXAto52HndP1TlDl SlsbwjxoCTeviIQTz7u8maU=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=PpeUG7nObgFfrfqbK+u8Y8N9kqV5MOe2Sj1DxUA8ipQ=; b=w YmFXZIAApqlNGUnN9VM8EPAF2rCP1Ig0mYhf+zF3OABvqQn09DWMFgHDK+JyxU3wN7BRopy6O3x1K d0XvrA/Ikllc0TeGJSz6jakL701oxB9+uvqeYMuh1DH8hhSI4icUrofZnPO31eDUFDv69OTA2Chcw vi+3/GzkjB1RkTiI=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=pass (vgate18.wizint.net) smtp.client-ip=2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from vgate18.wizint.net ([2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0] helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fYGU6-000296-SW for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 19:52:11 +0000 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: <0469f850-6d80-7e54-a181-165ee0a945b9@wizmail.org> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:52:07 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: vgate18.wizint.net ([2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0] helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 19:52:16 -0000 On 06/25/2018 05:09 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 6/25/2018 6:03 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: >> On 06/25/2018 04:44 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: >>> If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way of >>> knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean interpretation >>> of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- then it >>> isn't a standard. >> >> On that view, the spec should be either >> >>    "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, >>    invalidates the ARC set" >> >> or >> >>    "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, >>    MUST be ignored". > > > While there are some operational environments where one of these two > choices really is appropriate -- the need for extremely rigorous control > over the entire range of operational choice is... extreme -- this isn't > one of them. Then I'm unclear what you were asking for with > Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this information' demonstrates NON-standardization. Perhaps you could suggest some text for the spec? -- Jeremy From nobody Wed Jun 27 13:15:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0488C130EA8 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 ZQ5Et6_dWwWb for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x52a.google.com (mail-ed1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E53F130EA0 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id l23-v6so3818668edq.0 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=SLeqfSdpET6kRWIION4CYQWfp1maDba+TlUBGKHY6vw=; b=MYisHUxCvFN7xezck7sgZaao0Wbun4fzaeOw58e04vMTmD0JuMMAA+VC200f3qEbLM huF7LVQFMvw6TDwGd7Hqsxfp3yu+L52XBn8sX2H6yUJ45Echk0RoADD2SYN+MMkyyiLU RcVtMNsEA9h34xBYnEQJOyrZ+Xu/j5qXKtAxY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SLeqfSdpET6kRWIION4CYQWfp1maDba+TlUBGKHY6vw=; b=U2hYMxQImp2qoKRwojebTz7DOh47ag5F6XxKPZ9snsfnSjxNjEMcbqm6Ff5lp3Uv/J 7nK1YhlDtLGYWgnPDrev1BGSRWcL26UcJm4vJ59BMHnhHU+e/5ljbpaFo+dxAewRWoNQ +fVIOx+fOiA5GnpR8HL4fndS5lVvEQvCxvS/13ssBUmQGE4j1xePWrVfmps46krGh4sR ajr0PoF7RvLmOkDEQeMm7t35+Dgxs6QF3WUH2SRy7RzDzo1ZxxmHPS1LcMxk5UXpV23g i93l0gkwdBPUAJ1o6eHvcLjA9TBRzhFBGss2f68PuJ1K9UHdVIv93dOqWvOKj9WpbXkr OqJg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1szoi8R4on9LCTZHrGY7ydRhzJFIP/rG8l+vSKgmGee9MhGIeK ym4WPE1mUzz+Db1NpofjvI6AAUxHxW4ABbHgUDoCBg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdq6eoF/exLMR2rhKHdQlJvSRDx62Iq9oOllxkdDbv9hQxCWxM4KsFDFBMfS6AnCbu0PKy7zbQm8It0HVpXhoE= X-Received: by 2002:a50:b962:: with SMTP id m89-v6mr5996873ede.20.1530130513015; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kurta@drkurt.com Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0469f850-6d80-7e54-a181-165ee0a945b9@wizmail.org> References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> <0469f850-6d80-7e54-a181-165ee0a945b9@wizmail.org> From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:15:12 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: z0D-XwHCUpBgnOv8xs1Nf7bmXgo Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b0496f056fa545d6" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:15:17 -0000 --000000000000b0496f056fa545d6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/25/2018 05:09 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: > > On 6/25/2018 6:03 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > >> On 06/25/2018 04:44 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: > >>> If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way of > >>> knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean > interpretation > >>> of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- then it > >>> isn't a standard. > >> > >> On that view, the spec should be either > >> > >> "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, > >> invalidates the ARC set" > >> > >> or > >> > >> "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, > >> MUST be ignored". > > > > > > While there are some operational environments where one of these two > > choices really is appropriate -- the need for extremely rigorous control > > over the entire range of operational choice is... extreme -- this isn't > > one of them. > > Then I'm unclear what you were asking for with > > > Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this > information' demonstrates NON-standardization. > > Perhaps you could suggest some text for the spec? > > We already tried to walk that line in the spec. In general, any tag that does not have a defined interpretation (firstly in the ARC spec, then falling back to the DKIM spec) gets ignored with certain exceptions, such as the "h" tag in an AS header. --Kurt --000000000000b0496f056fa545d6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On W= ed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> wrote:
On 06/25/2018 0= 5:09 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 6/25/2018 6:03 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>> On 06/25/2018 04:44 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>> If the creator of the information does not have a reliable way= of
>>> knowing what the receiver of it will do with it -- I mean inte= rpretation
>>> of the information, not follow-on policy decision-making -- th= en it
>>> isn't a standard.
>>
>> On that view, the spec should be either
>>
>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 "any tag not specified here, in any of the three= ARC headers,
>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 invalidates the ARC set"
>>
>> or
>>
>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 "any tag not specified here, in any of the three= ARC headers,
>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 MUST be ignored".
>
>
> While there are some operational environments where one of these two > choices really is appropriate -- the need for extremely rigorous contr= ol
> over the entire range of operational choice is... extreme -- this isn&= #39;t
> one of them.

Then I'm unclear what you were asking for with

> Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this infor= mation' demonstrates NON-standardization.

Perhaps you could suggest some text for the spec?
<= /blockquote>

We already tried to walk that line in the s= pec. In general, any tag that does not have a defined interpretation (first= ly in the ARC spec, then falling back to the DKIM spec) gets ignored with c= ertain exceptions, such as the "h" tag in an AS header.

--Kurt=C2=A0

--000000000000b0496f056fa545d6-- From nobody Wed Jun 27 13:20:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 135AB130EAB for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:20:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org 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 ujc47mUF4EuS for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F360130E23 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:20:20 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; cv=none; a=rsa-sha256; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1530130820; b=ZCW3rHCSN3DdF4NVTx2xVqAiIeRbbVMfgmcrx9i23TgYThfJtnAfRjy6apaKTpIlUhJ7dFykU4 WJDINydRE4FwO4krQnUTuNInvmQ8SnQbHNJBzzfgTq31yVcutStJJysbpTdsc9m8uYBHRE5R5e syMePopWQu6npYEs103/k7Y=; ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; wizmail.org; iprev=pass (vgate18.wizint.net) smtp.client-ip=2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=r201803; t=1530130820; bh=t8h/+ToGBywG1abaGNxJih+R9FOHkQK3rP6XiGGNVb0=; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:DKIM-Signature; b=q288RTxQhhI9+gmtRgUOdV1wWLvgBY4A43gCGtLAJy5gskCOmOB9LhFlQHx95ALodcbhDq1kCm mWqtXcaJbARNXw3X3NLgui76TwA30GfcHnx2t0q2LHRXywOKDobMhN0xdO28ZPfb2Stn1BePgO wpei9YNR9gy2hYHyFczOII0=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r201803; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=YSM9hpIrKSUKrzJnUiDEKmq2oW/pM9wNDgGl3BCdMqc=; b=H 2kUhFGA8CJj/PPF8s6BoB+2/CFhlwM/5iaxsekfqGsCNDHyG6MLNcVNfQgeMPWsTzpVl8cy8Vsn9N /UhfMLLO/d3oYAhG/njfG6q3YjLzTID1NhF3B6Ycg9GFKiGpB+gEvpRXDGEpqn/VcV/2IcdCS/U6f TAdvwyE95dp54L0M=; Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=pass (vgate18.wizint.net) smtp.client-ip=2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org Received: from vgate18.wizint.net ([2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0] helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91.105) id 1fYGvK-0002zE-O4 for dmarc@ietf.org (return-path ); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:20:18 +0000 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> <0469f850-6d80-7e54-a181-165ee0a945b9@wizmail.org> From: Jeremy Harris Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=jgh@wizmail.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFWABsQBCADTFfb9EHGGiDel/iFzU0ag1RuoHfL/09z1y7iQlLynOAQTRRNwCWezmqpD p6zDFOf1Ldp0EdEQtUXva5g2lm3o56o+mnXrEQr11uZIcsfGIck7yV/y/17I7ApgXMPg/mcj ifOTM9C7+Ptghf3jUhj4ErYMFQLelBGEZZifnnAoHLOEAH70DENCI08PfYRRG6lZDB09nPW7 vVG8RbRUWjQyxQUWwXuq4gQohSFDqF4NE8zDHE/DgPJ/yFy+wFr2ab90DsE7vOYb42y95keK tTBp98/Y7/2xbzi8EYrXC+291dwZELMHnYLF5sO/fDcrDdwrde2cbZ+wtpJwtSYPNvVxABEB AAHNJkplcmVteSBIYXJyaXMgKG5vbmUpIDxqZ2hAd2l6bWFpbC5vcmc+wsB7BBMBAgAlAhsD BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAUCVYAYBAIZAQAKCRC85YyM5B8y34iFB/9wozIY RogNdY1aejFFixb6++y4b1riyjMvWEULeEzDlQ0lMT6Z3PxXhZILD4y4aP7Kzx0ozXa5qaKy 41EAPKQoPipnRAH04QytJbIERvz8Tot/LeCVKUc0G9DVxOPBD03czTgqgz4EjV2qvnLF+rTU 0YBevrNCluKosGSd+3RvLWVu0hBhn9pELKfXJNSQXZb+TpHDhSDZ/gCrglBEOhA6YWbDb/4g z+5TFKdk+B++iAQZSHv7zISabjN+BPYgI47A+MU4JycoXaAUnMc0l5ba6fGNaIrzruE4aAZr lP5o+7mlU9Mm0QJqdqYxYPAiplJGrZv+YXH1fp5ueEK3l+NGzsBNBFWABsQBCADphLHaKToR uR/E7THerBiCjDatwCaETOKOTY2zRBQpaQ32p/F2XIGLS8Cc27+grZSKQ6ZX0ZN47O+AFyFH F8DH90IXZFpJR3Rb8zgXT8jnLX08DM31eECZHnRzFhGlOmq6WAUlqB3GKCPUCY2c4eTRXyoX LteTxrXCYoj45y/YmvlZrlonBNjPBAyHiO/LNz+V7fZtNsN7N/XGrnLbcdNfNd+SD1ENmbLJ 8RvyymxguTyB/ka9JdjHHIoQEJ6L166B3hhfCHpt8iC0GPZkti9IMl0NoJ029jJm3Jq1qEce EBn5H5QMGn6Fq64iXwTsO1TMNUwpWx8pjvV7wVIxjI8ZABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkFAlWABsQC GwwACgkQvOWMjOQfMt9N6Af8CS2CTrMQFdhkGEtBXmL4ifD8UHFkBRBGmM8ZL2fWUBTZXT8m rdRMOK6tcPnKWaCvWvKr0knt970j/DyAgFmH8hgOi3yctigFecVDjjilAeCJMq38s1tYKYiL DbBdHWtdkA9uHZwq3lfd3QxcEEO3QamQF+dO7h8gAOXlG+po87Hm+E0wz4swIB8+S37Jzrx9 uu0LSFDfJCTK+TIKGa5Un8LxPxyq9WnnNDh72zK7BiRidk/s40KcNod83NM4Hn/sbGfyLa8s S0F3ME0S+ocSMOiu/ZHHOiwpLYNbwTJ7stZxGsrguWeT9P+amxbA/YlK95LedstwvN+WcHZ7 d++Arg== Message-ID: <7ccb655d-e63c-6dde-4eb7-3dfb01dc03c4@wizmail.org> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:20:18 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pcms-Received-Sender: vgate18.wizint.net ([2a00:1940:107::1:2f:0] helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:20:22 -0000 On 06/27/2018 09:15 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > We already tried to walk that line in the spec. In general, any tag that > does not have a defined interpretation (firstly in the ARC spec, then > falling back to the DKIM spec) gets ignored with certain exceptions, such > as the "h" tag in an AS header. That does not say why that specific case is worthy of special attention. I think you need to justify it. -- Cheers, Jeremy From nobody Thu Jun 28 08:03:00 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDAF130DCF for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 MdpGdhi447K8 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A132B130DC7 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id c8-v6so4980262qtp.10 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=wtAVOc4j71z9xM0wOlFaRmy6/Qje7XdeDvyQIdsKuAU=; b=bcP4uOFyokdU6+tERiJ/xrzmDRV4Q/7YuWU3c6QYZVpxdeCT/Vf6c1Y6AlEpgyPCH0 5rjXo4MSKHylNxq9W4OXJpOB53/YRmKRQtlzmtRTYZkyS0JuUvM/m3oxk0HN2qbBKZeA pguyPZkz6+aG1O4jNG4cWs4oxy/9C45mhJDVuTK5lam0LYM0IiCijqTxjXoqMBx2/NGu P06FExv4b5ETUgqooeg6qgkDxxD9BqA3/CY9mV+GnZ7vijIY4mKuGQGMvsn45r06G+lL yXIm5ZJJ4AFNBQkjHn4i3i5JxeIAJlKEPdMMqZdmg5Vu9NkqoMlqMHbbPnkgAmqx1mmq liMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wtAVOc4j71z9xM0wOlFaRmy6/Qje7XdeDvyQIdsKuAU=; b=g+bRWphSTlGmGQoesKxwEjqfyDutGVP8JbmvDGm47QzDV2sHK7r4A0B5zcZN/RgKdy G7sety3B9VSo3oWXWcKxglSU/3r+w2B3RGP9euoqaXRNMt0vm0doZxj810mFVNZDMwzv a8UCh3WbrROT/o+dQyrSkL4l3flPD4PzsHDrs8EJF30C7aHswj1AvLjDEqa0a0TpR4XV d5y+6gnhTU5vxNYBpcpdQX5jBR+G6WaIJdLGWeIcFH5j/HvHxz3oSsx4SLn+1aTKRCOe Z4Tjc/ewQzHkbJx655V9Psi+yK4PZUTbOhhs8/KEvnkt/WXRcECOh34+tiQf0CDUaedR v4DQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2hZNG6f+ZPM7sYEqIg+0SqdM4xONarV8NhFiEy8PS0WXtqDRf9 Lo80opXyE6GBxk71yBfRNi3blJtRlaIGWdY3nwc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcT8WRqna0ZmOSIpjOg6xxHyWLmKY6wVRdxtSxwY8XX6+gTAUGgu1rSrXsVN7+s15pgLFUcxY6XYe5VhG2Cyfw= X-Received: by 2002:aed:3e82:: with SMTP id n2-v6mr9755464qtf.359.1530198176126; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 2002:ac8:1b32:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:02:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <152786312552.15177.12221606326917455864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <152786312552.15177.12221606326917455864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Barry Leiba Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 11:02:55 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ir75S0V73oQ5HKdf3_dCdVyWs5I Message-ID: To: dmarc@ietf.org Cc: Alexey Melnikov Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 102 X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:02:59 -0000 As you've all seen, I requested an hour in Montreal. I think now that we don't need it: what we have to do right now is concentrate on reviewing -15, calling for working-group last call, and then requesting publication. Unless I hear a reason not to in the next day or day and a half (let's say by end of day on Friday, 29 June), I will ask Alexey to give our time slot to the EXTRA working group, which needs the time. Barry On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 10:25 AM, IETF Meeting Session Request Tool wrote: > > > A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Barry Leiba, a Chair of the dmarc working group. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Working Group Name: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance > Area Name: Applications and Real-Time Area > Session Requester: Barry Leiba > > Number of Sessions: 1 > Length of Session(s): 1 Hour > Number of Attendees: 30 > Conflicts to Avoid: > First Priority: artarea dcrup dispatch iasa2 cfrg jmap saag cbor > > > > > People who must be present: > Ned Freed > Barry Leiba > Alexey Melnikov > Tim Draegen > > Resources Requested: > Experimental Room Setup (U-Shape and classroom, subject to availability) > > Special Requests: > Chair has to leave Thursday night, so please avoid Friday > --------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc From nobody Thu Jun 28 08:59:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E69A130DDE for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 aAPbomrACEz2 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A457130DC7 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id l23-v6so5489405edq.0 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=uk9BKrnOSp6XtpzULbVuxBB5nrF9suFQs0BuPviathg=; b=A2a8TMSzgi+myP2wZvrD7ZMMDiQRaE+Ua0omE8Q5YVN5Q9jXH/QABbIdihpJLOWdW3 BYIlCrc7eqn8JUKBiUlji6PNjYMCdYf4Mt/1DJylcG7+VWG204wigkeM7sWtaNDJQXhy k/voPGDwyMfv8/u9bBBlYBw8+Fho9axwnVnSk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uk9BKrnOSp6XtpzULbVuxBB5nrF9suFQs0BuPviathg=; b=Ybujnck17/g5MB5gJS5sRjXL1h9hrLovUo6z8L+nnT3PSO26UKFoT97vp3XsFSx2IE P8iUoQm7aKJ0EENRQ6gQma9XU2G2P3SsqQHBVK6yzK5pzbp0TX4IA9Zt9wmyYQj1pZP1 hYIrQ1lKWnqYOl9v9h2DhGaPlrubRtyKm/wHh76sMgZZzj+lT4AUr1XihpnrhxzQSrx6 J+up5RerlVHTYMzoWL7wTmba7TjXVSFk0qvPrvCcsV5t6K5Mv0XGh2GojDnLK++5p0nV KiyWS4jvh3ZXYUNrTpy9++DTCr7Tl53GqKNZjz2x7TL0TrBVsuZIVpuq0YEOIzse/v5z 6Hxw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0BzBNkSbFG04J3/gLf49uj7lIEL7a3hGSTaczuqKOEa3igDBxF dsunN1ir2uQkvAiseVBUtlbozIORdIn5sUKN+7wiyQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdIzvnHi2E/gNajcD4jNBqqGgJXw3lgHg/lt1w0hhltQzcxjuHswfXBCK0wxYTX1Aro3DMoFKsMGGEHUvt5Jkc= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d598:: with SMTP id r24-v6mr9420406edq.176.1530201553056; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: kurta@drkurt.com Received: by 2002:aa7:da87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <152786312552.15177.12221606326917455864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:59:12 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: udsgX09_pnzPg_m9o5tdrG5ZDI0 Message-ID: To: Barry Leiba Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" , Alexey Melnikov Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000014dd7056fb5d0aa" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 102 X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:59:17 -0000 --000000000000014dd7056fb5d0aa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Barry Leiba wrote: > As you've all seen, I requested an hour in Montreal. I think now that > we don't need it: what we have to do right now is concentrate on > reviewing -15, calling for working-group last call, and then > requesting publication. Sounds good to me. At this point, I've received one substantive fix (correcting the spelling of Tim's last name in the Authors section) and a few formatting cleanup items (duplicative "Section Section" verbiage) - both of which I have fixed in a proto-draft that I could publish if desired. --Kurt --000000000000014dd7056fb5d0aa Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable --000000000000014dd7056fb5d0aa-- From nobody Fri Jun 29 08:14:00 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541D912F1A2 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:13:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.751 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=stFoBKTw; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=YWKarNtK 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 VsyILKbMYgkK for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 2B559126CC7 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 73065 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=11d65.5b364cb0.k1806; bh=pNPwSvZK1abm8BCcoLtcXJacA74iTBO726yK/YWWH7o=; b=stFoBKTw0aFmTINF6lCc2h+dULteIBf7dQlKIqqWfJ82aM6GaJDSnIBi8a1JiPFeit6coKk5rnutLixlbEC6cmq+3hnQyOyke9QL3EqL/VIvFEAwrKfaCq55B2tdZEIXQsu9TAE3uk2ZkRpybvt6i6FJHCAwKgXrBaWBOpoUHsr4jMywgx/txkt3tCm5gEb1UowpCaC5GkPhavRWStLca8aIrcrtqeirxELVLekVxfNNCT0EMIRtelO1zpqEnZab DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=11d65.5b364cb0.k1806; bh=pNPwSvZK1abm8BCcoLtcXJacA74iTBO726yK/YWWH7o=; b=YWKarNtKR/Ec1TQDa+f6D380+dlWVCWpAl2gFjnT3AxKnVb8S2p1SD25QPaQ9vDfPvUMFaGL/Wb6SabagHKudR+x+kvULGA4slmGzZ7YIcsX18tfz5lc0G2eaBedyGFNVkQXZQkLDi4AxVY1oI2EufVY6jHVzzbkbGm7At0AtkXmV4jJ6ifQ6dziaMg3wDcrryGwZlXrmRD07iGUmWVSfjbBQIgQ9P+PWC/eY1O7NMW6NC+/sx3pRxPnidWCTzbF Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 29 Jun 2018 15:13:51 -0000 Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 27CE328A2EAD; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:13:50 -0500 (EST) Date: 29 Jun 2018 10:13:50 -0500 Message-Id: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> From: "John Levine" To: dmarc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:13:54 -0000 In article you write: >> Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this >> information' demonstrates NON-standardization. Not at all. The point of a standard is to say here is what you do if you want to interoperate. Trying to figure out how to recover when someone else doesn't follow the spec is a fool's errand, since there are more ways to misimplement a spec than any of us can imagine. I suppose we could put in a sentence or two reminding people that unlike DKIM, the list of tags in the spec are the only ones allowed in an ARC header, so don't try to invent new ones. R's, John From nobody Fri Jun 29 19:14:07 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C52D130E2F for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:14:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.192 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.192 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isdg.net header.b=btZnwa2E; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=beta.winserver.com header.b=rsdrpQ0x 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 vlTd36AegdWP for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from listserv.winserver.com (unknown [76.245.57.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE91130DD7 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=913; t=1530324832; atps=ietf.org; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From: Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=RrsbkYNLs3OzzRK8DUME7+YPRqw=; b=btZnwa2E9wij5VCjR3RmXQcYOfQ29xFSUCiIDWYjN/sNz9i9oDMLmsqv4a/xwC 9vemEuyyr2ClFW5W+PjQvX1z8gLAVFkD4RAq71LhmEKAteuuqp+UDnh+8ouTdt5S 61Rp9bJf8JkU3etQv64qnBckXB5pSRYfy3aGKOg7T1+rI= Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.6) for dmarc@ietf.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 22:13:52 -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 beta.winserver.com ([76.245.57.74]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.6) with ESMTP id 3013480244.1.1608; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 22:13:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=913; t=1530324263; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=B3qv4uD jWBeuYPLEKFOsButCGa6T8jWUcuyP6StezCc=; b=rsdrpQ0xyLy303cOIPrmXDO 3IyBC8H7dFKXLjOMuwba2JrxjLNUWZzAEdOxwhBUmn87YZ55gP136kgJrnhGtiIp xZJsVBmko87LZTN0FMCYFUmrdG2DccLOrukGdHewPY6WM9SVJhhM114AmJy9RS44 0IOP/Kbi/zYnq+0vIuR0= Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.6) for dmarc@ietf.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 22:04:23 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.68] ([99.121.5.8]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.6) with ESMTP id 603574125.9.1356; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 22:04:22 -0400 Message-ID: <5B36E75D.5010004@isdg.net> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 22:13:49 -0400 From: Hector Santos Organization: Santronics Software, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dmarc@ietf.org References: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> In-Reply-To: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 02:14:05 -0000 On 6/29/2018 11:13 AM, John Levine wrote: > In article you write: >>> Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this >>> information' demonstrates NON-standardization. > > Not at all. The point of a standard is to say here is what you do if > you want to interoperate. Trying to figure out how to recover when > someone else doesn't follow the spec is a fool's errand, since there > are more ways to misimplement a spec than any of us can imagine. > > I suppose we could put in a sentence or two reminding people that > unlike DKIM, the list of tags in the spec are the only ones allowed in > an ARC header, so don't try to invent new ones. That's pretty tight. No room for exploration and experimentation, and imeo, this protocol will need more than a few explorations to see how useful it might be. -- HLS From nobody Fri Jun 29 19:41:34 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B18C130E2D for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 XrmS4Tk-HO8V for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl0-x22d.google.com (mail-pl0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D505E130E00 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 31-v6so5295433plc.4 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yoGI+UfGDMFxhXoiuCajqeg7lFhkjiVjN0Ii7Jywwvc=; b=TWJjXNEDF2rmTeS5XHVa8/ddeWUKUmF4fXIW/x3/3FTrapEkmTtaiXjl+Zoo6y9g8C 0tPUamsrUSa96QWK73gVabPXMlLIKOe3SEYoc/YccOWRKQEbN1yGzTTuAzj1ZRJFGRzQ Ko2X5rUkxCLbtjYPc75WESBfvxKJmPvFlrJ0jByDZPg2dxaMIduPG1XbCdiD37NTTRPh SQD3LvNPH4Bx11CAd2VXp5ysh9xEZS47Wsy8l6nldwxlB0htRDl4JCOIKxhz539XpPaP z1Y9EvEb4/WhKU1Ph27LqK4Gmp9UmCAzyLODJXdJKCJMsaV0RDJC7d8okx2kFJhq9XrG kEFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=yoGI+UfGDMFxhXoiuCajqeg7lFhkjiVjN0Ii7Jywwvc=; b=TCP6RM7qAZ62w42zNy0xfUfbSIr1FqkIa8ca3fPC9h/1Ib+5FW5YJYCgfoDJu7N1WU j7TiEfmtESoJtPfS2hxdJOHRNX3eZNRH4LWT9y0hTyf83pBZ7HLv0PwIOAq+b8m5yCiK 1PrpMdpknfMt3yXI2tujmXLdXE60sScFbq7bYwWzoSS+8hkXfiKiLEncuxBnwPwjfDOM tDCcdRHb6D67iHmHaD6Ylxp67VWWQiWlyNMjshU7+mG1X2fhLucQwvVaWlzg4/Sc4Ofp D1xjyQWH1GNrGdA3LzP/wNSbQ91cr+u2Q5zylw6pyyK7poLUvzQqYzm3sz1fUEqgl4gV yw3A== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E12x426mAy4c7JIbdsaYcSlYf559h4cNFOLM1/DB8pZO8nL21Gs tHS9kIPJzjlLqDyp2/k/dTgUCSE4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIm/D/UM+mvBXc5TEqaMkYILuLPBN+QsyWIdNH4ISsS72jAnsA5GKbHLz4ltk/AKPGKhKqb7g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ab95:: with SMTP id f21-v6mr16927636plr.264.1530326488916; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [76.218.8.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p11-v6sm13347337pgu.16.2018.06.29.19.41.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:27 -0700 (PDT) To: John Levine , dmarc@ietf.org References: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> From: Dave Crocker Message-ID: <65da0e93-8faf-b9fd-3cab-f9f78104b7a7@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:23 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 02:41:32 -0000 On 6/29/2018 8:13 AM, John Levine wrote: > In article you write: >>> Anything that comes close to 'do whatever you want with this >>> information' demonstrates NON-standardization. > > Not at all. The point of a standard is to say here is what you do if > you want to interoperate. Trying to figure out how to recover when > someone else doesn't follow the spec is a fool's errand, since there > are more ways to misimplement a spec than any of us can imagine. Your first sentences asserts disagreement, but I don't see how the rest of the paragraph provides it, since it both looks reasonable and doesn't seem to contradict what I said. In any event, my language was carelessly broad and probably misdirected, so it might be worth some clarification and better precision: 1. A protocol specification defines a space to work within. If you work outside of that space, your activity has nothing to do with that spec. 2. If you are purportedly working within that space but take actions the deviate from prescribed actions (or include proscribed ones) then you really are violating the spec. So one of my points is that a specification has an obligation to specify actions that are clear and precise and reasonable. For all actors. 3. Not all protocol details are about actions. The ones about formats do not necessarily couple with directives about actions; that is, a spec might define syntax and semantics without saying what is to be done with the data. But specifications of formats, too, have an obligation to be c-p-r. Although there are situations that justify common packaging for 'private' information -- that is, non-standardized data inside a standardized container -- the usual case imposes standards on the data semantics too. That goes to the other point I meant to make: A specification that basically says that data may be interpreted in whatever way the receiver wants is not specifying a standard, because the encoder has no way to predict how the decoder will interpret it. (This was at the core of the DKIM d=/s= debate.) > I suppose we could put in a sentence or two reminding people that > unlike DKIM, the list of tags in the spec are the only ones allowed in > an ARC header, so don't try to invent new ones. That's a major decision to make. It impedes innovation, so it should be justified pretty carefully. In the text. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From nobody Fri Jun 29 20:16:33 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2403D130E7F for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 20:16:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.751 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=kxEV01sZ; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=dYO0RNag 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 ZU4G2sbilVSp for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 20:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 79414130DD7 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 20:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 35948 invoked by uid 100); 30 Jun 2018 03:16:27 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=8c68.5b36f60b.k1806; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=zO32ZXEtit/d58BNJFqQxe5/S6G0mvTRQnuiN2yJZiQ=; b=kxEV01sZwdbKugDA3LE8FGs/ze1cATMjOP3v7CxL/HyY3BG7Xs1o0b3+ob/Q2qr58/FPqNh96W2AyMdDhOlWb87RJsZ141mkM8VvqL7wYBvZtPGFAkEJqIZRN3tLtDIlJOBg/9HqTJmlWwp18acxNVEgg6JIxfCuwxkks/Y0s1LwcxVBLPJdPojLuR+0MLxVMOHKo0dhOAoZmsK+LB7qeo2UiYYbx9HcUJIQ5Rm5u6P0J15JXTKnN/1YLRadgdl9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=8c68.5b36f60b.k1806; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=zO32ZXEtit/d58BNJFqQxe5/S6G0mvTRQnuiN2yJZiQ=; b=dYO0RNagAYncax1Y6asTn3+LVm/noGIWuPDpObD/lVDyqeqjrrQP3MI6jIwzpiNRyySmfUf9lO0mhbnwqRxNuRB6En8FGi57HonbivfnotcNwgNqyEUfuUXk/uSqXPHHDMvAq0W+zu4lBNGFs4nXtgXQC/lq/4dT9mW7Y7IeO8ZmX/6JNXjd3A/IvqkdEFKmdlPUOPzrgV3MGPaIlUg5COIHgntlPwCpnDHWXWgNgQmWqGOUt7SB5kcfqK45D/9s Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 23:16:27 -0400 (EDT) From: John R Levine To: Dave Crocker cc: dmarc@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <65da0e93-8faf-b9fd-3cab-f9f78104b7a7@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> <65da0e93-8faf-b9fd-3cab-f9f78104b7a7@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (BSF 202 2017-01-01) Cleverness: None detected MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 03:16:31 -0000 On Fri, 29 Jun 2018, Dave Crocker wrote: >> Not at all. The point of a standard is to say here is what you do if >> you want to interoperate. Trying to figure out how to recover when >> someone else doesn't follow the spec is a fool's errand, since there >> are more ways to misimplement a spec than any of us can imagine. > > Your first sentences asserts disagreement, but I don't see how the rest of > the paragraph provides it, since it both looks reasonable and doesn't seem to > contradict what I said. I think I'm agreeing with you and disagreeing with the person who said otherwise. If you want to interoperate, implement what the spec says and don't worry about people who implement it wrong. >> I suppose we could put in a sentence or two reminding people that >> unlike DKIM, the list of tags in the spec are the only ones allowed in >> an ARC header, so don't try to invent new ones. > > That's a major decision to make. It impedes innovation, so it should be > justified pretty carefully. In the text. The alternative is to say to ignore mystery tags, but then we're in the same swamp we got to with DKIM v=2, tags that modify the intepretation of the signature. Perhaps we should try and figure out the least bad way of allowing new signature algorithms, since that's the most likely change to happen soon. R's, John From nobody Sat Jun 30 06:33:27 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE5D130E6E for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 QZ0MNZBqx35v for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x235.google.com (mail-lf0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DA20130E2E for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x235.google.com with SMTP id m13-v6so8740453lfb.12 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Bp1axxqy4S4slSwwG14979dG7i5F5NeAyQz0W3IXNiY=; b=gYJozcuFpEqJR5wTc/WoxKIlfgkOiz34Xe7eTI4ShqINm4TMod60kUc1t+yzh8kPUH lBrYZgonSGO/7rLcsbBCpydUb3Z0ScgaYJwrU9+87B6n/W00XCrqapBExLQRDxn6qLco pX1hPhqP8vadj4QTYiGwjKdrEMfLu6h8IAvRish2sYJzdqq76FEdyPJAqoXWlYJ9EFlD EUNaTELe4k2gEycPOUqv6dPsZFmsg9WHJn/0KgpEwngP6zSrUIXDmeoLlAac4F6SUEZp GLolzMRRE6BMA70rMP5DlksQKGjz2UKmVnZ8qhIdw3n7/hpm/deVFedKFr2jgyEGY2uR uc3w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Bp1axxqy4S4slSwwG14979dG7i5F5NeAyQz0W3IXNiY=; b=gzaddKIViauuw1K/OIVs2f2XsNP0kariK0qBY0eRbU+A2zwgEoNkWllSY564S9fVDe xW8pOjWU5+GCZAKW6wr6dDuNC2wGyr0lIN7PHTBAccxI1FN5PiUE3hPIQNwNTXkKJJZ0 Jw51kETt1N3GSZxDpnhdMJNz1urSMa50oS0DvDsqNPT4u9eoZne17qTS+sbIRy4K2SCn 7qaR9IcBGqf2C+kH9LzZmiVbNgrteqf2jLags0x9dc82HNL3FIiwpq1I+oVSAglMAm0m BzBv6Xl3RUGEIkAs4+2BCoTYLn/OgrXCbG3smpW9RAtZ7Tn7xRPevlyEAG+bgLOkFshb lRnA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3DZYTBCq8F3sn+nWwQ2Nob+1OdRUih7yXyjVhJtSdracdj0+XJ MhIDjT9TIhLWc8r03kvH6jXKhQlAUaEZH+2e9f7AWA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfcJqSku8krhZJpnmvhsO/syJ0JXJLVGc5p4IQnELuiXvKDkxTO0UCCIMWDnr8rfBCG8ooS774samD0nwIadlg= X-Received: by 2002:a19:4f58:: with SMTP id a24-v6mr9839118lfk.140.1530365601625; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:3a13:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:33:20 -0700 Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: dmarc@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000fbd07056fdc02c6" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:33:26 -0000 --0000000000000fbd07056fdc02c6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > "any tag not specified here, in any of the three ARC headers, > MUST be ignored". In my view this is the right approach, but keep in mind that what's valid in an AMS header field value is largely defined by what's valid in DKIM, and what's valid in DKIM is defined in RFC6376 plus any later updates to it or anything that registers a new tag. And what's valid in AAR is anything defined as valid in RFC7601, plus any registered additions, plus "i=". AS is the only one with a tightly constrained set. -MSK --0000000000000fbd07056fdc02c6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizma= il.org> wrote:
=C2=A0 "any tag not specifie= d here, in any of the three ARC headers,
=C2=A0 MUST be ignored".

In my view th= is is the right approach, but keep in mind that what's valid in an AMS = header field value is largely defined by what's valid in DKIM, and what= 's valid in DKIM is defined in RFC6376 plus any later updates to it or = anything that registers a new tag.=C2=A0 And what's valid in AAR is any= thing defined as valid in RFC7601, plus any registered additions, plus &quo= t;i=3D".

AS is the only one with a tightly constrain= ed set.

-MSK
--0000000000000fbd07056fdc02c6-- From nobody Sat Jun 30 06:40:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3C1130E6E for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 bNSenKN9Ss9X for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x22e.google.com (mail-lf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 073AA130E2E for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id a4-v6so8763197lff.5 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/PwsdKynxt4ocf+1CpiV8QNKOroTI4XjhO6z2WC65Jw=; b=Xe1PJlWpBQj0/GJEXro/zuSMQ+3uN17DQJKBPK4LFbuO/8pBfImVoEWvRkRkhVqI81 VDZyTeJ3z+fPqIQnleqJq5KhMlSDnXFrSltdRiCfGjIRPgfz2EW4xvV6RZjOacfysI6U JhjJ/ce5WCRMwWsScjmu2HG00EpHS1xHjMtqrmI/I9NaZ6HTHUy3bifA0rlmSb76RYaI PXshr0eOkzzuXqC6HULcg8kAu1cMMUdUQCi7JT5v0AqvwkomtEkBVoj8W1Rqf0/fijIW UMyVIMwwfRWVJyWajLxg2dHsDGv9pgGD7DorLrCw53nr0UvtAJQPJy41PjyIn/s8me8R 9ngA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/PwsdKynxt4ocf+1CpiV8QNKOroTI4XjhO6z2WC65Jw=; b=kdppTf3X9XDHIzlZQuIIDcv0CdIAJi0BeIeqDeaNytfIEe+dVRjBBfxEsYslRZ/DFJ vpsjW40HJOKXEoOdkZQYkNYLuAiCp4i4sRPKF8YL4LFLTDHDUJbbXsimJ9CrW4LfWt+F 6579OzWjSj+Dwv6KnUZl4jLLetQBqXZwJFhMd/EibCdPAJ5ElkQOUDYjjmjEIfZ8JV/z XFUMTgR1np3Jg6Pa1O7cGyu07ASthekGRujPC999b3nAjjRIu/5ryATO9st/ckkAN/xS j3YQUf4BhvB99K9ShVKpP+Fh5mS+vxBAosLY+rzpMfnLsWqmys/L55BLWE6uU5/tkgZT MTIA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3Qp4bJI0XEV+qIFFFjUSsEZETGJ0Q3meQr1G2LfIJPWbM8DI9S Hv33j30dbR4MKIJ56rPhuF31iRMloD4daIPu34QVDQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfIztgC272rg33tUjuXR9TFR7N2Lchgx3T0Y4/aO+qBSsrhUXIl/aDipETuwJBxWDg62XHRrmTDbFSMijqMlwI= X-Received: by 2002:a19:ce51:: with SMTP id e78-v6mr11004291lfg.99.1530366041275; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:3a13:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7ccb655d-e63c-6dde-4eb7-3dfb01dc03c4@wizmail.org> References: <02a23bd0-bada-8b67-7cac-7698df4af4fe@wizmail.org> <13b26f0a-25e6-d9ec-5ca5-5fef522f8738@gmail.com> <739ce6a2-bb43-3e0b-cd4c-168b54e9009c@wizmail.org> <4955b936-fd82-532a-05fd-b1cd702ff91e@gmail.com> <0469f850-6d80-7e54-a181-165ee0a945b9@wizmail.org> <7ccb655d-e63c-6dde-4eb7-3dfb01dc03c4@wizmail.org> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:40:40 -0700 Message-ID: To: Jeremy Harris Cc: dmarc@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000444406056fdc1c75" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:40:46 -0000 --000000000000444406056fdc1c75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 06/27/2018 09:15 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > > We already tried to walk that line in the spec. In general, any tag that > > does not have a defined interpretation (firstly in the ARC spec, then > > falling back to the DKIM spec) gets ignored with certain exceptions, such > > as the "h" tag in an AS header. > > That does not say why that specific case is worthy of special attention. > I think you need to justify it. I think saying: Notably absent from this list is the "h" tag. It is not required for the ARC-Seal because the list and order of header fields included in the seal are prescribed in this specification. ...should suffice. -MSK --000000000000444406056fdc1c75 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizma= il.org> wrote:
On 06/27/2018 09= :15 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> We already tried to walk that line in the spec. In general, any tag th= at
> does not have a defined interpretation (firstly in the ARC spec, then<= br> > falling back to the DKIM spec) gets ignored with certain exceptions, s= uch
> as the "h" tag in an AS header.

That does not say why that specific case is worthy of special attent= ion.
I think you need to justify it.

I think say= ing:

Notably absent from this list is the "h" t= ag.=C2=A0 It is not required for the ARC-Seal because the list and order of= header fields included in the seal are prescribed in this specification.

...should suffice.

-MSK
--000000000000444406056fdc1c75-- From nobody Sat Jun 30 07:00:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BEB112F295 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 L2CnjTUR-Q21 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46F3512F1AB for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id h2-v6so6150731ljb.10 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QTBnxaASWnlbo/kTvFdP/zjU8C5hUxwK34S4Vi1F3+U=; b=skAYIltSXEhwHPh3MoeA8oXIt3m6dtpX4DMwEWCI26Nl+GcmBPp9LmhpnuXxwWarT2 5vxqZN32sriUDfx6QMJO6UrQEHigu6UK42QYaEOKz2kfWwli/ljIJCuOMo7gGfRLh8SH cbQWdfcruAM7OUyEBy0+eref375Y5C4vh8Y1XWv4fOvMcNNr/rTIDypDo045vaX1D2cU vA0ThWCILld448TSZd4GOOIhmaIvnfD91u9e/VaE6Alk8suhBf9vaq0e8E7/uATUfcfi Nysi5T50D3H7r3x697W0kztwTFIliARpneIz0CxTOLLAnHzpZxUze1PqXNfrdYCliSsZ 7WqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QTBnxaASWnlbo/kTvFdP/zjU8C5hUxwK34S4Vi1F3+U=; b=T3abTzB/S/RekgBjIQhJlNuBjzYx3aQs1KKtMq9voubmkzehpxvFX1Rw5rFHdeXush +pZlVk4h0xjhgTQoyNVxNECTrAa2Yjsb0Vhw1HFkR+HsNzdqOnAs2m8JuFv9AHMTGEsC EugwAUO1+PC9Rn8aw/i3JidLKAnzA59KXxXZL3mlcFfEQGIA3HY3q06HCT1Xz04FdaLg TqAhXNar3kdW8me7QplwCjKjJJFa1qjWi37Sh39fv5Qqy4Gx9gPhDtY/snKTz1SqoL5d tk2mPQ1SfwjZQhmHLyGEbwr0LHSHKN0C7A6pWN6ov+ztv4+VAmwzhO+OxlVzLHlS8WT3 yZ6g== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2MHOEgSx1y44Ynd013iPQnkCMADHlfTf3IAUYavKSefRcl0u/u BE8BJDwTn2Alz2ORXqMtY1Fs+ZLvCmGW0IGIiAkeLg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpexuegOF2Y7Iy6D4vyjKETz0An9P32awzJGnqWqIWorqTo/N3TBoh/4p1YRZZpOEUAXvLQZ0C5f7mYyTjt4xJs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:4242:: with SMTP id p63-v6mr4089587lja.83.1530367208542; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:3a13:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:00:07 -0700 Message-ID: To: Kurt Andersen Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d75673056fdc6196" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:00:14 -0000 --000000000000d75673056fdc6196 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 9:27 PM, Kurt Andersen wrote: > I've now posted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. It should be ready for last > call - please review with that in mind. Note that the XML was a little > wacky in the Implementation Status section. I'll fix that formatting in the > next rev. > I haven't read the entire thing yet (I will before Montreal) but I've noticed that the organization of Section 5 has gone a little sideways: * In Section 5.1, bullet 3 seems weird because it doesn't describe a step * Section 5.1 is titled Sealer Actions, but Sections 5.1.4 and onward don't actually enumerate actions for the sealer; they contain advice and general discussion A couple of other quick points until I can do a full pass: * Section 9.2, bullet 1: For this attack to work, you don't have to forge signatures; the signature could be the letter "x", and you'll still hit the DNS to get the public key to try to verify it * The IANA registration templates in Section10.1 are improperly formatted * All of the formal references to old versions of the draft seem unnecessary; simply using prose for those should suffice rather than bulking up the Reference sections -MSK --000000000000d75673056fdc6196 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 9:27 PM, Kurt Andersen <kurta@dr= kurt.com> wrote:
I've now p= osted draft 15 of the ARC protocol. It should be ready for last call - plea= se review with that in mind. Note that the XML was a little wacky in the Im= plementation Status section. I'll fix that formatting in the next rev.<= br>

I haven't read the entire thi= ng yet (I will before Montreal) but I've noticed that the organization = of Section 5 has gone a little sideways:

* In Sect= ion 5.1, bullet 3 seems weird because it doesn't describe a step
* Section 5.1 is titled Sealer Actions, but Sections 5.1.4 and onwa= rd don't actually enumerate actions for the sealer; they contain advice= and general discussion

A couple of other quick po= ints until I can do a full pass:

* Section 9.2, bullet 1:= For this attack to work, you don't have to forge signatures; the signa= ture could be the letter "x", and you'll still hit the DNS to= get the public key to try to verify it
* The IANA registration te= mplates in Section10.1 are improperly formatted
* All of the formal= references to old versions of the draft seem unnecessary; simply using pro= se for those should suffice rather than bulking up the Reference sections

-MSK
--000000000000d75673056fdc6196-- From nobody Sat Jun 30 17:26:33 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA571130EBC for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:26:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.611 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.611 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailforce.net header.b=YsOf1djZ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=uDyDS8dq 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 X2WPrZmOA9YT for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51387130EB8 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EA921687 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 20:26:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 30 Jun 2018 20:26:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailforce.net; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=i4VPVyeb56X1nm3EbZ52ofm0Ex5Tf gGBhQScK2tlpGw=; b=YsOf1djZK670UhpyQF2kisYta/MZmpaNQveoize4jtKmZ nmwnOti3yaJKClsjBjytpNvgfFtQJbeancSXwjFadKyDQaOVK2J8XnMnjdEguCWw Hjq6wex4kJ6lqjE2rK+LTmRiaVRhvkoelvEukLtjNYxzpn/Py2Za+eoeupa/re4E QwmXBIWaCRYyIbIrv4MNK9FCSzuze/Z+EzlzeveMELuWmLAwmomujt/k5OK91lNn Q+JAv4NRvShqfDZGbTnw1n5xeDbGPvvPFw47f+DFeixB507kIVp98vsnascE297b Nzysd9oJM55RLmpWuM1NiZ3Vk9Io7C53Y6Cc+fhRg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=i4VPVy eb56X1nm3EbZ52ofm0Ex5TfgGBhQScK2tlpGw=; b=uDyDS8dq+DbViFXTLTq7kJ m5VEL4+jpgRcYDdPiS1NdO9IvH0aPi00ly4QiNvJeBvMVRJMSEhUatXrT6Vppjbf jpwA0Q7B+8mwgi22ggpw7NJD8wZeouUAan1XTeXsHf18SgBNNLwD+a3YUe9zhH/q rjH28ymvoLkh/v8QVboz/LyyFMx5nYoUulii1PPGaVwYyOWu3kA0V98iLf55uOVp TitBxpqa32d6SuwPekD52qi4Smak7M5JIJNMrvK2qg32IzKkAKoBUkMV6H/lrGG4 7y5GvZW5bJLZLni8l44W+RfIw1Oqfs1l09Q7lIx/zK7gLKrThoHsFsVilhWep1xQ == X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: References: <20180629151351.27CE328A2EAD@ary.local> <65da0e93-8faf-b9fd-3cab-f9f78104b7a7@gmail.com> From: Stan Kalisch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <4CF9E244-444C-4C5F-B3ED-A426B8A2B5B9@glyphein.mailforce.net> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 20:26:24 -0400 To: dmarc@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC protocol-15 posted X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 00:26:32 -0000 > On Jun 29, 2018, at 11:16 PM, John R Levine wrote: >=20 > Perhaps we should try and figure out the least bad way of allowing new sig= nature algorithms, since that's the most likely change to happen soon. Yes. Especially because this spec is intended to be experimental. Thanks, Stan=