Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-16: (with COMMENT)

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 13:44:09 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-16: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

- Abstract: Please expand DMARC on first mention.

- 4.1.1.1, last bullet: "However, for known brands, all active domains
are likely to be
      targeted equally by abusers."

I'm not sure quite what is meant by "known brands". Is this the same as
well known email services?

6. Some of the mentioned mitigations involved relaxing alignment checks.
Do those warrant a mention here?

-- last paragraph: " Section 4.1.3.3 warns that rewriting the
RFC5322.From header field
   and changing the domain name should not be done with any domain."

I'm not sure I understand that sentence, especially around "not be done
with any domain". Nor do I see which text in 4.1.3.3 specifically says
that.