Re: [dmarc-ietf] Been Quiet Around Here - Org Domain? Tree Walk?

2022-03-17 Thread Douglas Foster
With this comment, we see the pernicious effect of using a binary psd=(y|n) token to represent a multi-valued role.When the role indicator is missing, there is no default value, instead it must be inferred from the context.Since the author of the proposed text is confused on this point, it

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Been Quiet Around Here - Org Domain? Tree Walk?

2022-03-17 Thread Douglas Foster
In the general case, we allow for this possible configuration: public suffix domain segments organization domain for public registration organization subdomains of the organization registration point for private registration clients organization domain for private registration clients sub

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis and Standard Track

2022-03-17 Thread John Levine
It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said: >The status we're going for is "Proposed Standard". Note the word >"Proposed"; a document seeking this status doesn't need to be bulletproof ... I would expect a great deal of institutional pushback at a change directly from informational to full standa

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis and Standard Track

2022-03-17 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
Sigh... On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 2:50 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > The status we're going for is "Proposed Standard". Note the word > "Proposed"; a document seeking this status doesn't need to be bulletproof > out the door, as some evolution based on experience is required. The > standard fo

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis and Standard Track

2022-03-17 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 1:13 PM Dotzero wrote: > My understanding when the DMARCbis effort was spun up was that we were > trying to move it to Standard Track. Is this still the goal? A number of > experimental things are currently being included. This would seem to > preclude DMARC being on Stand

[dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis and Standard Track

2022-03-17 Thread Dotzero
My understanding when the DMARCbis effort was spun up was that we were trying to move it to Standard Track. Is this still the goal? A number of experimental things are currently being included. This would seem to preclude DMARC being on Standard Track. If the experimental items being discussed wer

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Been Quiet Around Here - Org Domain? Tree Walk?

2022-03-17 Thread John Levine
It appears that Alessandro Vesely said: >> To find the org domain for a domain: >>chop the domain to the last five labels and walk up the tree. >>stop when you find a DMARC record with psd or you hit the root. >>if a record has psd=n, that's the org domain >>if a record has psd=y

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Been Quiet Around Here - Org Domain? Tree Walk?

2022-03-17 Thread Todd Herr
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 11:27 PM Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > I'll take another shot at it, but I'm unlikely to finish it tonight. > > I've been working to incorporate the proposed text that Scott submitted the other day, and following along with the discussion since, and I think I've got a new d

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Data Query: Non-existent subdomains

2022-03-17 Thread Alessandro Vesely
On Wed 16/Mar/2022 03:10:03 +0100 Douglas Foster wrote: I started from the assumption that we would want to generalize NP into organizations.   But after spending a lot of time on the subject for the last 15 months, I am convinced that it is not needed. Assume that a university or other organi

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Been Quiet Around Here - Org Domain? Tree Walk?

2022-03-17 Thread Alessandro Vesely
On Thu 17/Mar/2022 04:02:00 +0100 John Levine wrote: It appears that Scott Kitterman said: It took a fair amount of editing and I expect you all will have further suggestions, so instead of getting up to my elbows in XML, I took the published DMARCbis-05 text and updated it directly. The mod