----- Original Message ----- > From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]> > To: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 7:58:59 PM > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on > draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txt
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) < [email protected] > > wrote: > > > Section 4.2: > > > > > > I'm generally unsure about this section. It will eventually (sooner than > > > later) refer to a number of expired documents. It might be more helpful > > > to > > > the reader to just summarize the idea behind each approach in a paragraph > > > rather than forcing the reader to chase down specific expired I-Ds. > > > > > I don't see a good way to avoid referring to (eventually) expired I-Ds. > > That's the best way to catalog the ideas, but I did take your suggestions > > on > > rephrasing the intent of some of them into some new wording. > > I don't think you actually need to cite I-Ds just to enumerate the general > approaches that have been proposed. Perhaps use this for the bullet list: > o Third party authorization schemes provide ways to extend identifier > alignment under control of the domain owner. > o A way to canonicalize messages that transit mailing lists so that their > alterations can be isolated from the original signed content. > o A way to record message transformations applied at each hop so they can be > reversed and the original signed content recovered. > o "Conditional" DKIM signatures, whereby the author domain indicates its > signature is only good if accompanied by a signature from an expected > downstream relay. > o Mechanisms to extend Authentication-Results [RFC7601] to multiple hops, > creating a provable chain of custody as well as a view to message > authentication results at each handling step. While the I-D will likely expires they will not be removed from the website, so references will still work, so I don't see as that bad that they are properly referenced in this document. I however agree we should provide a quick summary for people that do not need the details.
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
