From nobody Wed Aug 21 18:00:44 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0806312010E for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ctD5x-zl_qtc for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4552120086 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id F41F2B80DD5; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:29 -0700 (PDT) To: scott@kitterman.com, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, sm+ietf@elandsys.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Cc: bydonni8@gmail.com, spfbis@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Message-Id: <20190822010029.F41F2B80DD5@rfc-editor.org> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Subject: [spfbis] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7208 (5843) X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SPFbis discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 01:00:42 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7208, "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5843 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Jesus Donaldo Osornio Section: 9.1 Original Text ------------- Received-SPF: pass (mybox.example.org: domain of myname@example.com designates 192.0.2.1 as permitted sender) receiver=mybox.example.org; client-ip=192.0.2.1; mechanism=ip4:192.0.2.1; envelope-from="myname@example.com"; helo=foo.example.com; Corrected Text -------------- Received-SPF: pass (mybox.example.org: domain of myname@example.com designates 192.0.2.1 as permitted sender) receiver=mybox.example.org; client-ip=192.0.2.1; mechanism="ip4:192.0.2.1"; envelope-from="myname@example.com"; helo=foo.example.com; Notes ----- There's an error in the last example of this section: By the definition of key-value-pair, a "value" can only be a dot-atom or a quoted-string. The string ip4:192.0.2.1 in the mechanism key is not a legal dot-atom, so it should be surrounded by double quotes, to be a quoted-string instead Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC7208 (draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-21) -------------------------------------- Title : Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1 Publication Date : April 2014 Author(s) : S. Kitterman Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : SPF Update Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Wed Aug 21 18:36:40 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4801201A3 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:36:37 -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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b=FtbNZiNJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=PJK0MluM 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 CqBS-nbXa5mu for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD04B120169 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5AF8F80698; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:36:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1566437793; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=OQSAMAFG12KJr6mXY1Buo8Q8UJB0INcg38RY7GoGuuo=; b=FtbNZiNJz0Mu/ajRIYL+z7IBJE92hdRQ5LT/pBpp8j5SPWE/tzsc9+aK WDgAf9zo6jJO/bWY/NebHqYXucHFDA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1566437793; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=OQSAMAFG12KJr6mXY1Buo8Q8UJB0INcg38RY7GoGuuo=; b=PJK0MluMdED4rczxFhp57ldxUdukiat/uiNOzV5ogVz8mGzvL3yMUIXP styb+NXIV+fFYehWtDY+kL71c6CzYHCK8W3Xey5Bw9O5gUzKCxfWSqBVce iIhKJQF+PtNEndlh5eUhSISKpelJa/CgPtJWcfoKHZPuK1lYrJxqjnY1Nq ewSpM3ioKkJ0bhUTF4n6vWeQxmVEttINCGmp20ymwpIYRc0A638jHVlWJN ImLgEc7rRaiDoJdsn3es7yavSV5qNnggXNm8qobF08yGD0lV5sbByZ5C8n UjhNFQSQq/4G85I3/iD6qGecPkAMtLdCJCS4h1D24bP9FYLGQRDEFw== Received: from l5580.localnet (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0CF1FF804B5; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:36:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Scott Kitterman To: RFC Errata System Cc: ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, sm+ietf@elandsys.com, ajs@anvilwalrusden.com, bydonni8@gmail.com, spfbis@ietf.org Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:36:31 -0400 Message-ID: <6353492.6N3PlZknQH@l5580> In-Reply-To: <20190822010029.F41F2B80DD5@rfc-editor.org> References: <20190822010029.F41F2B80DD5@rfc-editor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [spfbis] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7208 (5843) X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SPFbis discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 01:36:38 -0000 The errata is correct in that the string ip4:192.0.2.1 is not a legal dot- atom. Based on the WG history, I don't have any indication that the WG thought this should be quoted. I think it's more likely we should be changing the ABNF to allow the example as it. My recommendation is hold for document update so we can review next time RFC 7208 is updated. Scott K On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 9:00:29 PM EDT RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7208, > "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, > Version 1". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5843 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Jesus Donaldo Osornio > > Section: 9.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > Received-SPF: pass (mybox.example.org: domain of > myname@example.com designates 192.0.2.1 as permitted sender) > receiver=mybox.example.org; client-ip=192.0.2.1; > mechanism=ip4:192.0.2.1; envelope-from="myname@example.com"; > helo=foo.example.com; > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Received-SPF: pass (mybox.example.org: domain of > myname@example.com designates 192.0.2.1 as permitted sender) > receiver=mybox.example.org; client-ip=192.0.2.1; > mechanism="ip4:192.0.2.1"; envelope-from="myname@example.com"; > helo=foo.example.com; > > Notes > ----- > There's an error in the last example of this section: > By the definition of key-value-pair, a "value" can only be a dot-atom or a > quoted-string. The string ip4:192.0.2.1 in the mechanism key is not a legal > dot-atom, so it should be surrounded by double quotes, to be a > quoted-string instead > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC7208 (draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-21) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of > Domains in Email, Version 1 Publication Date : April 2014 > Author(s) : S. Kitterman > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : SPF Update > Area : Applications > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG