[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] RFC2821bis discussion of DKIM and SPF (was Re: Error in RFC 5321 concerning SPF and DKIM)

2014-07-21 05:13:55

Let me try again.   Assume, if it makes you happy, that I
maliciously inserted those sentences as an evil, malicious,
swipe at the two protocols.  If they went in for -03 (I'll take
your word for it - I didn't check), then the community had circa
seven versions of the document in which the problem, however
significant or insignificant, could have been caught (my
recollection --I don't have the time to go back and check right
now-- is that it went into Last Call around -10).  The issue
wasn't caught, or at least wasn't raised.  And, if the text was,
as I think you are saying, unchanged after -03, certainly I
didn't somehow sneak it in as a private deal with the RFC Editor
after IESG approval.  

So, there is, IMO, a choice.   We can have a discussion about
what it means that the community consensus process didn't catch
and fix this (a discussion that would almost certainly affect
other individual submission standards track documents, even
updates of long-term specs).  Or we can focus on figuring out
what the right wording should be so that I can get it into the
editing copy for 5321bis.    I prefer the latter.  YMMD.


--On Sunday, 20 July, 2014 15:13 -0400 Dave Crocker
<dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:

On 7/20/2014 2:43 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, my editing notes on the pre-5321 I-Ds indicate that the
current text was not of my invention.   
    I was convinced, and remain convinced
that the spec if better with pointers to DKIM and/or SPF (and,
when it is updated, to anything else that may be relevant).  I
believe the consensus when 5321 was being developed was
consistent with that conviction. 

Subject duly modifed, since what follows has nothing to do with
technical substance...

The SPF/DKIM text was added to the -03 version of rfc2821bis,
on 25 April 2007.

In searching the SMTP mailing list archives, I am not finding
any discussion that is on point.  A brief exchange about SPF
and IPv6 and another about DKIM basic, but nothing about this

And the text's dealings with DKIM differ markedly from what was
discussed on the list.

So your reference to "consensus [being] consistent with that
conviction" prompts a query to what venue and discussion you
are referring to?


ietf-smtp mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>