SHOULD be the same?

I can't think of a good thing to say here, or a solid justification for any
choice.  I can't imagine why they would ever differ, but I can't come up
with a solid technical reason to demand it either.

As a verifier I might be skeptical if they're wildly different names, but
that's hard to write in a standards document.

-MSK


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Seth Blank <[email protected]> wrote:

> Does the group have any further thoughts here?
>
> I'm happy to suggest language for Gene's suggestion if there are no
> further comments.
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Gene Shuman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I definitely can't imagine any sensible case in which the d= tags should
>> be different.  I do think the tag should still be specified in both the AS
>> & AMS though.  While not strictly necessary technically, it does make the
>> language in the spec & implementation details a bit cleaner.  So I would
>> suggest simply adding a line/section in the chain validation section of the
>> draft or somewhere else that says cv=fail(or invalid?) if the d= tags
>> aren't identical.  I think this is an entirely reasonable restriction.
>>
>> =Gene
>>
>> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Brandon Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> When thinking about how to extract information from an arc chain, I was
>>> wondering at the "owner" of a section of the chain.
>>>
>>> Theoretically, that's the ADMD.  A single hop, however, has three
>>> separate domain ownerships, the srv_id from the AAR, and the d= field from
>>> the AS and AMS.
>>>
>>> Our current implementation uses google.com for the d= field, and we
>>> have three different srv_id's for different pools that serve different
>>> purposes.  That said, the srv_id has no "validation" except for by the key
>>> signature, so d= seems like a stronger "owner".
>>>
>>> Except, the AMS and AS can have separate selectors and domains.  I'm not
>>> sure if that's useful or desirable.  I'm tempted to only consider a chain
>>> valid if the domains are the same, and I guess not care if the selectors
>>> are.
>>>
>>> Should we require them to be the same?  If we do, should they only be
>>> specified once?
>>>
>>> For changing algorithms, I guess s would be different, along with a,
>>> though I would think you would need a separate set of headers for the hop
>>> for each a in transition...
>>>
>>> So:
>>> Should we require d= to be the same?  Should we specify it only once?
>>> If not, why not?
>>>
>>> Brandon
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmarc mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmarc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> [image: logo for sig file.png]
>
> Bringing Trust to Email
>
> Seth Blank | Head of Product for Open Source and Protocols
> [email protected]
> +1-415-894-2724 <415-894-2724>
>
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to