From nobody Wed Jan 11 08:33:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473FE129F24 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:33:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=pnlyIcDx; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=FB0r2lT3 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 BFUsLsJj5FXJ for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:33:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35765129F22 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:33:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 470122092C; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:33:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:33:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=HHfNrH8TkR5Aldm6+rkOr4AQhs U=; b=pnlyIcDxsb56V6/11Mju1V3NvolYph3DgxtxOLrbjKvNdbJXTyYJStmFPa dQQ02A9OL6eIjHIjtfUk9V/p2V9zEv2bCvgh6IJYh3sWZd9AC6avsFu6AL9vg3TT PUvD5qgTkz0sjI5AzI8ghkq5JbmBQsgC2D2rgFhwu7iT6zKGs= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=HH fNrH8TkR5Aldm6+rkOr4AQhsU=; b=FB0r2lT3bQNG5j7tLtYCw8mmKWZrkoeRrj TBB+NFksNWrEb6fYejPuGGnoH3rl/zyDTmqzBpiiJ/yvBgvDHMtUaoqwKGNA36Ji 8wUvvE+2yxjeZGPeIbmgxfebOArmf7wpbMPGT1UMSH6q2PrnDwmC7sW4E3R+eLx1 2vCQQA2aU= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 2C2236ABF3; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:33:16 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1484152396.3924999.844484848.7AB39DB7@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: Casey Deccio , Andrew Sullivan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-92a17122 References: <20161115125915.GB51667@mx2.yitter.info> In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:33:16 +0000 Archived-At: Cc: dbound@ietf.org Subject: Re: [dbound] On a path to closing X-BeenThere: dbound@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: DNS tree bounds List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:33:18 -0000 Hi, On Tue, Nov 15, 2016, at 09:37 PM, Casey Deccio wrote: > > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 4:59 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > I spoke with Jeff tonight, and we would like to make a modest proposal > > as a way of closing the WG: that we polish off and publish the problem > > statement, in an effort at least to get something written down about > > what issues there are and what distinctions someone might want to > > make. > > > > At the same time, we discussed addressing outstanding comments about > > SOPA and publishing it as an experimental RFC somehow (i.e. either ISE > > or AD sponsored). This ought to be possible: an RRTYPE allocation is > > expert review and I think we have something sufficiently clear as to > > meet the requirements. > > > > It strikes me that I probably just should have followed that path ages > > agoin order to test whether any of this was viable. I guess I know > > better for the future. In the meantime, though, does anyone object to > > pursuing experimental status (assuming we can specify what would > > provide evidence that the experiment worked)? > > While I have no particular objection, the same could be asked for the > other proposed solutions. ODUP [1] has proof-of-concept library code > [2], which has been tested both in OpenDMARC for experimental use with > DMARC and Firefox for experimental use with HTTP cookies. I've discussed how to move forward with the WG chairs. They will post a detailed proposal. Stay tuned. Alexey, as the Area Director From nobody Wed Jan 11 08:47:04 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dbound@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7BF7129F18 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:47:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.792 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.792 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=dcrocker.net 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 KphzFVecJ_ly for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:47:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 007FC129F03 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:47:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v0BGmPPI024308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:48:25 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1484153305; bh=AE8vvhtkDNTQT6HOGmfhQZ2kAulLTp53svYN8d3NV9s=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=VPBlB62QgObItTL1ODQDc3Fc+iPlDK3JdcLLrAE5kG3Re7TtXxsBNKN2tUkA+6d8S wr5HPfUWvO/hk7MlXW1JnjjPUF4axMXSBlXuuFAz6K9zAE2AGSTPA5Z9Jnow2y+1mA j+x1IRVYx5V/Ln/BljvsiZ6wXg4D/GA1ZD2gzHcc= To: Kurt Andersen , "Murray S. Kucherawy" References: From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 08:46:48 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: Paul Hoffman , "dbound@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dbound] The Fate of DBOUND X-BeenThere: dbound@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: DNS tree bounds List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:47:04 -0000 On 11/16/2016 4:36 PM, Kurt Andersen wrote: > What about publishing an experimental design spec along with the four > drafts? That could put a framework around the entire process and perhaps > avoid some of the challenges that SPFbis had when trying to move from > experimental to standards track. The WG could become the manager of the > experiment for a designated duration and responsible for collecting and > publishing the results. There might not be agreement about how to solve this topic (or topic/s/) but there seems to be agreement that it is an interesting and possibly important topic. And there's been quite a bit of serious effort, here. So marking that effort in the RFC archive makes sense to me, even if standards status isn't attached to any of it. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net