From jdfalk-lists@cybernothing.org Mon May 2 12:36:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B0DE0693 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 12:36:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PCldIoL11F1G for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 12:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ocelope.disgruntled.net (ocelope.disgruntled.net [97.107.131.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F07CE0766 for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 12:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.11.39] (c-76-126-154-212.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [76.126.154.212]) (authenticated bits=0) by ocelope.disgruntled.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p42Ja1bj023792 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 2 May 2011 12:36:04 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.6.0 ocelope.disgruntled.net p42Ja1bj023792 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cybernothing.org; s=triac; t=1304364965; bh=VQXkKzh9SN0hq+AKF0HhP+wmgICV0Z04dNT/njXBn XU=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=nHwxrsYjNUQd xzNuACkIhA9F7PwC4gcXA/Ljwe23O/ajc6jJ4tz2SDVpm7JTJsQCWN4UplZaWXSxvPC KbVH/MfvrhWkGkAZZ34Waj140tOjBr4/AAe8YDkifZS/d5NBajkh0NHAlveIle34fby jfU6tfj/VvfpQasqOVnfGGkNg= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: "J.D. Falk" In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:36:01 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110427131827.0490f778@elandnews.com> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 19:36:06 -0000 On Apr 27, 2011, at 3:53 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: > Let's start with reviewing the MAAWG document as something that is NOT > a working group document, and giving them feedback. So, does this silence indicate lack of consensus or lack of interest? = Or something else? -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions From vesely@tana.it Wed May 4 00:35:37 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A992EE06D4 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:35:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HIfxZShFeojx for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wmail.tana.it (www.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51C6E0691 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:35:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tana.it; s=test; t=1304494530; bh=y4io2San/e4hJEuTz67UM/nsHRbAhAXF4/99APdM2mI=; l=1118; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=PyrHy9nxkUdlAzSEWMAfUyCq3e6ljfVNaaBkwf8ZncaJeRaORI/3vRsFgMyLzWvcW EFVM6yN+VbwotxFBeUzqTaeOitvGtOeNemWZoJXGpRvV2voM+YZ9DRTC47EeN5qyJd Yzk7xMAgqDOF03Xy/OmVIDt5y6LP8dxws1dz6YOc= Received: from [193.0.25.241] (dhcp-25-241.ripemtg.ripe.net [193.0.25.241]) (AUTH: PLAIN 515, TLS: TLS1.0,256bits,RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA; Wed, 04 May 2011 09:35:30 +0200 id 00000000005DC039.000000004DC101C2.000078E3 Message-ID: <4DC101B1.3090209@tana.it> Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 09:35:13 +0200 From: Alessandro Vesely User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: marf@ietf.org References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110427131827.0490f778@elandnews.com> <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> In-Reply-To: <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 07:35:37 -0000 On 02.05.2011 21:36, J.D. Falk wrote: > On Apr 27, 2011, at 3:53 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: > >> Let's start with reviewing the MAAWG document as something that is NOT >> a working group document, and giving them feedback. > > So, does this silence indicate lack of consensus or lack of interest? Or something else? Apparently, the document faithfully reflects the content of the original pdf version that was already discussed last September. The interest seemed to be rather low also at that time. I suppose other participants discussed it in other occasions, since there was some consensus about having an RFC version of it. Hence, silence indicates there are no reasons for changing anything in it. (I'd expect contradictions if that's not correct.) BTW, the pdf only mentions Linda Marcus as author / editor. Would it be possible to retrieve who the (main) authors / contributors have actually been? The purpose for publishing the original in April, 2010 may be obvious after MAAWG presentation, in the section "About This Document"; for a minor point, making it explicit wouldn't hurt. From johnl@iecc.com Wed May 4 04:55:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BF9E0756 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 04:55:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -111.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T7aRPk0HvuWP for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 04:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [64.57.183.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168EFE0748 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 04:55:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 86433 invoked from network); 4 May 2011 11:55:53 -0000 Received: from mail1.iecc.com (64.57.183.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 4 May 2011 11:55:53 -0000 Date: 4 May 2011 11:55:31 -0000 Message-ID: <20110504115531.33228.qmail@joyce.lan> From: "John Levine" To: marf@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> Organization: X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 11:55:54 -0000 >> Let's start with reviewing the MAAWG document as something that is NOT >> a working group document, and giving them feedback. > >So, does this silence indicate lack of consensus or lack of interest? Or something else? I liked it when I edited it for MAAWG, and I still like it now. R's, John From jdfalk-lists@cybernothing.org Wed May 4 12:51:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DEEE06B7 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 12:51:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wZTRTAySRPkH for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ocelope.disgruntled.net (ocelope.disgruntled.net [97.107.131.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F5F4E067F for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.11.34] (c-76-126-154-212.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [76.126.154.212]) (authenticated bits=0) by ocelope.disgruntled.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p44Jp10t028404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 12:51:04 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.6.0 ocelope.disgruntled.net p44Jp10t028404 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cybernothing.org; s=triac; t=1304538664; bh=SWKp6uq5TgEDKcXf8PzDYR3bq/xDFAAa38fm5Mek6 II=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=JK6gAvQ7vTo6 QWi5iyCtD59/Xkt6pLnqlcnyngne3YQOrWeaZHaXPqFXVx3RB6Wr4r3iqFF3l3Bcn1k 2VyVPEudn52wsol5NpCHg8z3t0N9KKmJbU9cX7drE0m3mWgJocAi5WSD4ZrvBWGqcXg sBEOsxk4SkcPiwyIM53w4scAo= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: "J.D. Falk" In-Reply-To: <4DC101B1.3090209@tana.it> Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 12:51:01 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <580A3C3E-308E-40AE-85D4-2AC74B2AE00D@cybernothing.org> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110427131827.0490f778@elandnews.com> <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> <4DC101B1.3090209@tana.it> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 19:51:07 -0000 On May 4, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > BTW, the pdf only mentions Linda Marcus as author / editor. Would it = be > possible to retrieve who the (main) authors / contributors have = actually > been? The purpose for publishing the original in April, 2010 may be = obvious > after MAAWG presentation, in the section "About This Document"; for a = minor > point, making it explicit wouldn't hurt. There were a few editorial passes. Linda Marcus handles PR for MAAWG, = and does the final pass before publication of official documents. I = couldn't find her name in = http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_= BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, though. Which PDF are you looking at? In both MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, the Conclusion = section lists the "Primary Contributors" and their (our) affiliations at = the time. That's been reproduced and expanded under Acknowledgements in = draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-00. -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions From vesely@tana.it Thu May 5 03:38:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93748E06A2 for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 03:38:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.046 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.327, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U6l-S9FDFrWW for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 03:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11443E064B for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 03:38:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tana.it; s=test; t=1304591877; bh=WNVLX3MpBfGypboyKk3RKBMNwZmTGMSCDykPWFJtHKo=; l=968; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=UbTnBwToKnTn2iB2UhzdHueIOSlNdzu7wdrgjc0DSzw45eI1KNgKeKmcoVGe3AVB8 SgVqkZhzsQRJDDW2/tV789zEe/OB310L8Zw8gbRmJeux2srYZm1tfuooqe20A0Exci kZRI40rIkxvCFqh/qF7qthEGBmT5Y5jVNdX2DUZc= Received: from [193.0.27.158] (dhcp-27-158.ripemtg.ripe.net [193.0.27.158]) (AUTH: PLAIN 515, TLS: TLS1.0,256bits,RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA; Thu, 05 May 2011 12:37:57 +0200 id 00000000005DC039.000000004DC27E05.00006FAC Message-ID: <4DC27DF4.5000503@tana.it> Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 12:37:40 +0200 From: Alessandro Vesely User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: marf@ietf.org References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110427131827.0490f778@elandnews.com> <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> <4DC101B1.3090209@tana.it> <580A3C3E-308E-40AE-85D4-2AC74B2AE00D@cybernothing.org> In-Reply-To: <580A3C3E-308E-40AE-85D4-2AC74B2AE00D@cybernothing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 10:38:04 -0000 On 04.05.2011 21:51, J.D. Falk wrote: > On May 4, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > >> the pdf only mentions Linda Marcus as author / editor > > There were a few editorial passes. Linda Marcus handles PR for MAAWG, and > does the final pass before publication of official documents. I couldn't > find her name in > http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, > though. Which PDF are you looking at? That one, as cited in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_reporting#cite_note-2 Linda is named in file properties. > In both MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, the Conclusion > section lists the "Primary Contributors" and their (our) affiliations at > the time. That's been reproduced and expanded under Acknowledgements in > draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-00. Oops, I overlooked it, my bad. OTOH, this corroborates my feeling that the --00 version is perfect already. From jdfalk-lists@cybernothing.org Tue May 10 07:44:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4623BE06E5 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 07:44:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aWktPZwMaBK0 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 07:44:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ocelope.disgruntled.net (ocelope.disgruntled.net [97.107.131.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E971AE0659 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 07:44:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.11.38] (c-76-126-154-212.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [76.126.154.212]) (authenticated bits=0) by ocelope.disgruntled.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p4AEiTTi003372 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 07:44:31 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.6.0 ocelope.disgruntled.net p4AEiTTi003372 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cybernothing.org; s=triac; t=1305038672; bh=dQvd7tbhF9xGKmXJPbLjbEYc8razYgbA07f4/KUxj Pg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=M5VBqGLSiq27 t2g/AdWS/nIH/AVJjuDuwROaeUmyZ95akSeNDzz5Gp5dAIdOOp6GmDIPH2RETYY6gr4 2yNALkVH0Ase71y000CKTrgxXWCcQIqZiqfNqt1EV3Kzw2tu166H9WhAuybTWjKP9+w VKDSpOCLajJgtGXPvuRE9VyRU= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: "J.D. Falk" In-Reply-To: <4DC27DF4.5000503@tana.it> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 07:44:29 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <18EC997A-F8EC-4C68-952C-B9F394DE4435@cybernothing.org> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110427131827.0490f778@elandnews.com> <30AE36C3-BBAD-4374-9B86-797F0BB1C75D@cybernothing.org> <4DC101B1.3090209@tana.it> <580A3C3E-308E-40AE-85D4-2AC74B2AE00D@cybernothing.org> <4DC27DF4.5000503@tana.it> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [marf] Not an objection to FBL BCP X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:44:34 -0000 On May 5, 2011, at 3:37 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > On 04.05.2011 21:51, J.D. Falk wrote: >> On May 4, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: >>=20 >>> the pdf only mentions Linda Marcus as author / editor >>=20 >> There were a few editorial passes. Linda Marcus handles PR for = MAAWG, and >> does the final pass before publication of official documents. I = couldn't >> find her name in >> = http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_= BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, >> though. Which PDF are you looking at? >=20 > That one, as cited in = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_reporting#cite_note-2 > Linda is named in file properties. I'm fairly certain that's not normative. *grin* >> In both MAAWG_Complaint_Feedback_Loop_BCP_2010-08_0.pdf, the = Conclusion >> section lists the "Primary Contributors" and their (our) affiliations = at >> the time. That's been reproduced and expanded under Acknowledgements = in >> draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-00. >=20 > Oops, I overlooked it, my bad. OTOH, this corroborates my feeling = that the > --00 version is perfect already. Good to hear it! Anyone else? -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions From Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com Tue May 10 11:15:30 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9AC5E06C5 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:15:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.776 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.489, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m0+myELTsHpB for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.54.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 434E6E0698 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17803 invoked by uid 0); 10 May 2011 18:08:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box514.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.114) by cpoproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 10 May 2011 18:08:46 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=kingsmountain.com; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=kNKe+RkONuKGb73qjlZfzU6qezpAURl+hzY7sSdDXu5Ac1y0lyWqCe28W0UQNBRUaBw9/tdMA5kxC94OL5c4UnEjbOoz6oup5i9ZF79Yop/t+9OZiGNvzqeaLXS2k2HS; Received: from outbound4.ebay.com ([216.113.168.128] helo=[10.244.136.83]) by box514.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QJrMU-0008Ry-Ks for marf@ietf.org; Tue, 10 May 2011 12:08:46 -0600 Message-ID: <4DC97F2D.3040101@KingsMountain.com> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:08:45 -0700 From: =JeffH User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: marf@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {11025:box514.bluehost.com:kingsmou:kingsmountain.com} {sentby:smtp auth 216.113.168.128 authed with jeff.hodges+kingsmountain.com} Subject: [marf] fyi: New Non-WG Mailing List: mile -- Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange - IODEF extensions and RID exchanges X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:15:30 -0000 Of possible interest.. ------- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 10:15:02 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat To: ietf-announce@ietf.org cc: mile@ietf.org, Kathleen.Moriarty@emc.com, thomas.millar@us-cert.gov, trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: mile -- Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange , IODEF extensions and RID exchanges A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. List address: mile@ietf.org Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mile/ To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile Purpose: This list is for discussions, collaboration, and development of a document describing a subset of the Incident Object Description Exchange Format (IODEF) aimed at exchanging incident information focused on those things which people actually exchange, and which is easily readable by anyone potentially interested. This list will also be used to collaborate and formalize additional extensions needed by the IODEF and RID community to ensure current relevant use cases for the exchange of incident information are accommodated. For additional information, please contact the list administrators. _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce ------- End of Forwarded Message From msk@cloudmark.com Fri May 13 10:41:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE2DE070A for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:41:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.900, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vRiLKKcuRsaI for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:41:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505F0E067A for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:41:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:41:03 -0700 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: "marf@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:41:03 -0700 Thread-Topic: Split of dkim-reporting draft Thread-Index: AcvuyIpY+f7jSu5PT/qtisKL4qBtOwizEoJw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4B9EXCHC2corpclo_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:41:05 -0000 --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4B9EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I haven't heard back from any of the other document authors. Is this work = progressing? I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and = JD has posted his redaction BCP. Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you? -MSK From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mur= ray S. Kucherawy Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM To: marf@ietf.org Subject: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft The consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting draft= into smaller documents. I believe the split should go as follows: - Defining the auth-failure report type (someone besides me should= take up authorship of this, but I'll do it if nobody steps up) - DKIM/ADSP extensions (I'll keep this one unless there's objectio= n) - SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered) - Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a new document o= r could become a chapter of the BCP document) I'll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one away fro= m me. Scott, please start working on a draft and post something when you'r= e ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike. JD (and others), what's your view on the best location for the redaction te= xt? -MSK --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4B9EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I haven’t heard back from any of the other document aut= hors.  Is this work progressing?

I expect to have the reduced d= kim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and JD has posted his redaction BC= P.

=  

Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you?

 

-MSK

 

From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mail= to:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sen= t: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM
To: marf@ietf.org
= Subject: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft

 

The = consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting draft int= o smaller documents.  I believe the split should go as follows:

 

-          <= ![endif]>Defining the auth-failure report type (someone besides me should t= ake up authorship of this, but I’ll do it if nobody steps up)

-      &n= bsp;   DKIM/ADSP extensions (I’ll k= eep this one unless there’s objection)

-          SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered)

-       = ;   Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; t= his may be a new document or could become a chapter of the BCP document)

 

= I’ll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one aw= ay from me.  Scott, please start working on a draft and post something= when you’re ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or such= like.

 

JD (and others), what’s your view on the best location for th= e redaction text?

 

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>-MSK

= --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4B9EXCHC2corpclo_-- From barryleiba@gmail.com Fri May 13 10:57:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A6AE07E1 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.058 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.058 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2NLqxuRsYqJ for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE46E082D for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gwb20 with SMTP id 20so1210863gwb.31 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=h54Op9K4283u/Oa6cZkaEnM1JNNYIneD63fAACmnhLg=; b=axhNsS49InzYU2ofPjEzZxBfSZfs64JMPHfs/fDLvW/4n80P5eYejNAx+VOqrA6X0T 95On47WmqCysjzaH6CyJlcctQAgtYL/zovtDOatJt3aU8Xfqou/OEITmtZzngRuZXHKi lqbmzy72Mxu8gLZzW2TyFquwWbmhAarYzV8zE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=p3EZo4/lEJWpYj8twsz9nw5D6nyK29Cw4arBkRgCuXFZOsFhySk5hteThXj8Z9UwN/ 1gr4bqLQUUW0GsgI6JfTB0FfNSrZS+u4HAasbG0U2uqCi9j25Zrz9Q/k1NeEGgz6kDSf Cm8uR/UZNzVO/9XW/1T42MLoedKfe46q9mb70= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.180.227 with SMTP id j63mr1756262yhm.213.1305309426344; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.108.49 with HTTP; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:57:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 13:57:06 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PN_1mOe-lcVlDAOAGQkvo0kdzf0 Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Message Abuse Report Format working group Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:57:07 -0000 Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the MARF working group: > Filename: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback > Revision: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A000 > Title: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Email Feedback Report Type Value : not-spam > Creation date: =A0 2011-05-13 > WG ID: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Individual Submission > Number of pages: 7 > > Abstract: > =A0 This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback > =A0 report type value: "not-spam". =A0It can be used to indicate that a > =A0 message that was tagged or categorized as spam (such as by an ISP) in > =A0 fact is not spam. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general. We'd like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting it. It seems like an easy ride, I think. Murray will handle all chair responsibilities for this if it's adopted, since I'm a co-author. Barry, as participant From msk@cloudmark.com Fri May 13 10:59:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3783AE082F for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:59:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.750, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xslORupZtqYG for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:59:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C4BE081A for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:59:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Fri, 13 May 2011 10:59:44 -0700 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: Message Abuse Report Format working group Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:59:43 -0700 Thread-Topic: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt Thread-Index: AcwRlzCYVyH7Z3L3Q6+BgGvWfdIQJQAAC1uQ Message-ID: References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:59:45 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of B= arry Leiba > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 10:57 AM > To: Message Abuse Report Format working group > Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-f= eedback-00.txt >=20 > Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the > MARF working group: > [...] > As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA > SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general. We'd > like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting > it. It seems like an easy ride, I think. Seems appropriate given our chartered task remain in line with SpamRep and = seek consolidation. I think it's appropriate to bring it into the WG. -MSK [as participant] From steve@blighty.com Fri May 13 11:05:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9F0E0849 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CgVJj1H9FiKb for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from m.wordtothewise.com (misc.wordtothewise.com [184.105.179.154]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133D9E0839 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.80.43] (204.11.227.194.static.etheric.net [204.11.227.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: steve) by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29ED22EA07 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: Steve Atkins In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:20 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <7B6F8C62-0C3B-4180-8F93-337D665BB736@blighty.com> References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:05:28 -0000 On May 13, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Barry Leiba wrote: > Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the > MARF working group: > >> Filename: draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback >> Revision: 00 >> Title: Email Feedback Report Type Value : not-spam >> Creation date: 2011-05-13 >> WG ID: Individual Submission >> Number of pages: 7 >> >> Abstract: >> This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback >> report type value: "not-spam". It can be used to indicate that a >> message that was tagged or categorized as spam (such as by an ISP) in >> fact is not spam. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback > > As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA > SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general. We'd > like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting > it. It seems like an easy ride, I think. Probably. Seems harmless. Is this intended for communication between MUA and message store (doing much the same thing as an IMAP move from spamfolder to inbox folder) or is it something that's intended for broader use across administrative boundaries (like, say, ISP pushback to Postini)? Cheers, Steve From hfontana@ecertsystems.com Fri May 13 11:18:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B5DE073D for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qe29CbgJTA5U for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0729E0679 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so518423qyk.10 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ecertsystems.com; s=google; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Pyk5g/JNq6y41E85emsPPq+0znTyXU7KegEoc/9v+ug=; b=ZzxsTlndufCSV3iMJOhKanAyCEdJvI1rC+wNeZ+7ul7yzIiTdSYHiZYBQI/nSEFbK8 pdZsY4Sn4q4zwZczsko+Gj8n482K7wscSHAWeAR4Y2/YE4sBXAmBz4xHsVmWf/ka3jmL rsTMZXe7yU1Yl4Esa5lN/eDy0UeVnc7QC4i6E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=ecertsystems.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=kf2WlZZwtU16nMh/kOPj25uwrCXIJvWNzgmXcW8zS4ZicaTvq3ZIMeg7qo8AWovwuK wPu77AwYYNqpZTKOW6B4GZ9/dEI9ELijjcYYu0VHT6IEvU7E5bX7Akim3FPp97wEuX4E zQEyeilJuqn29bHR0YfU7OsdUoIkdE0E9FXDo= Received: by 10.229.69.197 with SMTP id a5mr1361658qcj.273.1305310729145; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.99.149 with HTTP; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Hilda Fontana Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:18:29 -0700 Message-ID: To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6541d36550f6404a32c56be Cc: "marf@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:18:52 -0000 --0016e6541d36550f6404a32c56be Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I didn't realize it was due this weekend - Scott Tony? I don't think I'll make this weekend On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wr= ote: > I haven=92t heard back from any of the other document authors. Is this w= ork > progressing? > > I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, an= d > JD has posted his redaction BCP. > > > > Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you? > > > > -MSK > > > > *From:* marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf O= f > *Murray S. Kucherawy > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM > *To:* marf@ietf.org > *Subject:* [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft > > > > The consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting dra= ft > into smaller documents. I believe the split should go as follows: > > > > - Defining the auth-failure report type (someone besides me > should take up authorship of this, but I=92ll do it if nobody steps up) > > - DKIM/ADSP extensions (I=92ll keep this one unless there=92s > objection) > > - SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered) > > - Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a new document > or could become a chapter of the BCP document) > > > > I=92ll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one away > from me. Scott, please start working on a draft and post something when > you=92re ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike. > > > > JD (and others), what=92s your view on the best location for the redactio= n > text? > > > > -MSK > > _______________________________________________ > marf mailing list > marf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf > > --=20 Hilda L Fontana VP, Technology eCert, Inc. One Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105 p: 626.676.8852 f: 415.651.8932 **eCert - Trust the MessageTM *www.ecertsystems.com* * * ---------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is CONFIDENTIA= L and is intended only for the use of the addressee. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or fro= m making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments and an= y copies of such printouts. Thank you for your cooperation. --0016e6541d36550f6404a32c56be Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I didn't realize it was due this weekend - Scott Tony?=A0 I don't t= hink I'll make this weekend

On Fri, M= ay 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@cloudmark.com> wrote:

I haven=92t heard back from any of the other = document authors.=A0 Is this work progressing?

I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, = and JD has posted his redaction BCP.

=A0

Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from= you?

=A0<= /p>

-MSK

=A0<= /span>

From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [= mailto:marf-boun= ces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM
To: marf@ietf.org
Subject: [= marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft

=A0

The consensus at our I= ETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting draft into smaller document= s.=A0 I believe the split should go as follows:

= =A0

-=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Defining the auth-failure report type (someon= e besides me should take up authorship of this, but I=92ll do it if nobody = steps up)

-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 DKIM/ADSP extensions (I=92ll k= eep this one unless there=92s objection)

-=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteere= d)

-=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; = this may be a new document or could become a chapter of the BCP document)

=A0

I=92ll start work on t= he first two until someone takes the first one away from me. =A0Scott, plea= se start working on a draft and post something when you=92re ready; let us = know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike.

=A0

JD (and others), what= =92s your view on the best location for the redaction text?

=A0

-MSK


_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
marf@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf




--
Hilda L Fontana
VP, Technology=A0
eCert, Inc.
One Market Street, Suite 3600
San Francisco, CA 94105
p: 626.676.8852
f:=A0 415.651.8932
=A0
=A0
eCert - Trust=A0the MessageTM=A0
=A0
----------------------------------------
=A0
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
=A0
The information contained in this= =20 e-mail and any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and is intended only for the=20 use of the addressee. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution,=20 dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the=20 e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in=20 error, please notify us immediately and permanently delete the e-mail,=20 any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media and=20 destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments and any copies of=20 such printouts. Thank you for your cooperation.
=A0

--0016e6541d36550f6404a32c56be-- From msk@cloudmark.com Fri May 13 11:22:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2A8CE073D for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id So96yOMabYaQ for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11303E0679 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:44 -0700 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: Hilda Fontana Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:44 -0700 Thread-Topic: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft Thread-Index: AcwRmjY2OKVqnNm3RvKxrf8AxA7RCAAAGrTw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_"; type="multipart/alternative" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "marf@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:22:48 -0000 --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_" --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It's not "due", that's just when I'm planning to do dkim-reporting. Part of the effort, though, is to determine whether or not the group has en= ough momentum to meet at the next conference (July in Quebec City). So far= there doesn't appear to be much progress on anything, so I'm guessing not.= .. -MSK From: Hilda Fontana [mailto:hfontana@ecertsystems.com] Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:18 AM To: Murray S. Kucherawy Cc: marf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft I didn't realize it was due this weekend - Scott Tony? I don't think I'll = make this weekend On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy > wrote: I haven't heard back from any of the other document authors. Is this work = progressing? I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and = JD has posted his redaction BCP. Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you? -MSK From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-boun= ces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucheraw= y Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM To: marf@ietf.org Subject: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft The consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting draft= into smaller documents. I believe the split should go as follows: - Defining the auth-failure report type (someone besides me should= take up authorship of this, but I'll do it if nobody steps up) - DKIM/ADSP extensions (I'll keep this one unless there's objectio= n) - SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered) - Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a new document o= r could become a chapter of the BCP document) I'll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one away fro= m me. Scott, please start working on a draft and post something when you'r= e ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike. JD (and others), what's your view on the best location for the redaction te= xt? -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list marf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf -- Hilda L Fontana VP, Technology eCert, Inc. One Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105 p: 626.676.8852 f: 415.651.8932 [cid:image001.jpg@01CC1160.142D2FA0] eCert - Trust the MessageTM www.ecertsystems.com ---------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is CONFIDENTIA= L and is intended only for the use of the addressee. Any unauthorized use, = disclosure, distribution, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited = and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibi= ted from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from makin= g any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received th= is e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and permanently delete the= e-mail, any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media a= nd destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments and any copies of suc= h printouts. Thank you for your cooperation. --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It’= s not “due”, that’s just when I’m planning to do dk= im-reporting.


Part of = the effort, though, is to determine whether or not the group has enough mom= entum to meet at the next conference (July in Quebec City).  So far th= ere doesn’t appear to be much progress on anything, so I’m gues= sing not…

 = ;

-MSK

 

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>From: Hilda Fontana [mailto:hfontana@ecertsystems.com] Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:18 AM
To: Murray S. Kucher= awy
Cc: marf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim= -reporting draft

 

I didn= 't realize it was due this weekend - Scott Tony?  I don't think I'll m= ake this weekend

On Fri, May 13, 20= 11 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@cloudmark.com> wrote:

I haven’t heard back from any of the other docum= ent authors.  Is this work progressing?

I expect to have the re= duced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and JD has posted his redac= tion BCP.

 <= /span>

Scott, Tony, Hild= a, any updates from you?

 

-M= SK

 <= o:p>

From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2= 011 3:52 AM
To: marf@ietf.org
Subject: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft=

 

The consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting d= raft into smaller documents.  I believe the split should go as follows= :

 

-          Defining= the auth-failure report type (someone besides me should take up authorship= of this, but I’ll do it if nobody steps up)

-        &= nbsp; DKIM/ADSP extensions (I’ll keep this one unless there= 217;s objection)

- &n= bsp;        SPF extensions (Scott= Kitterman volunteered)

-&= nbsp;         Redaction BCP = (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a new document or could become a chapter = of the BCP document)

 

IR= 17;ll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one away fr= om me.  Scott, please start working on a draft and post something when= you’re ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike.=

 

JD (and others), whatR= 17;s your view on the best location for the redaction text?

<= p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:= auto'> 

-MSK


___________= ____________________________________
marf mailing list
marf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo= /marf




= --

Hil= da L Fontana

VP, Technology 

eCert, Inc.

One Market Street, Suite 3600

San Francisco, CA 94105

p: 626.676.885= 2

f:  415.651.8932

 

3D"Image

 

eCert - Trust the MessageTM 

 

---------= -------------------------------

 

CONFIDEN= TIALITY NOTICE

 

The infor= mation contained in this e-mail and any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and is = intended only for the use of the addressee. Any unauthorized use, disclosur= e, distribution, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited and may b= e unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from = any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use= of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail= in error, please notify us immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, = any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media and destro= y any printouts of the e-mail or attachments and any copies of such printou= ts. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

 

= --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_-- --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="image001.jpg" Content-Description: image001.jpg Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.jpg"; size=377; creation-date="Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:44 GMT"; modification-date="Fri, 13 May 2011 11:22:44 GMT" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAYABgAAD/2wBDAAoHBwgHBgoICAgLCgoLDhgQDg0NDh0VFhEYIx8lJCIf IiEmKzcvJik0KSEiMEExNDk7Pj4+JS5ESUM8SDc9Pjv/wAALCAAnAGABAREA/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEB AQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1Fh ByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkKFhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZ WmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXG x8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oACAEBAAA/APZqKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK//9k= --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4C6EXCHC2corpclo_-- From johnl@iecc.com Fri May 13 21:49:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D75E0694 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 21:49:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -111.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bo2boB99UN6F for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 21:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [64.57.183.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37492E066C for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 21:49:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 53904 invoked from network); 14 May 2011 04:49:40 -0000 Received: from mail1.iecc.com (64.57.183.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 14 May 2011 04:49:40 -0000 Date: 14 May 2011 04:49:18 -0000 Message-ID: <20110514044918.18983.qmail@joyce.lan> From: "John Levine" To: marf@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Organization: X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 04:49:43 -0000 >Part of the effort, though, is to determine whether or not the group >has enough momentum to meet at the next conference (July in Quebec >City). So far there doesn't appear to be much progress on anything, >so I'm guessing not... Giving the intense competition for meeting slots, it might be better to skip a slot have an informal meeting over lunch or in the bar. R's, John From vesely@tana.it Sat May 14 04:15:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A64E06B4 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 04:15:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.346 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.346 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.627, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SzMyie3n6MRL for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 04:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D66CE0689 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 04:15:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tana.it; s=test; t=1305371726; bh=Yv2HEWWiUiYMA4OS4fBJmusO5+t7gj9UzeMJCV782pg=; l=2040; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=GUS1f5gL7E1uwXUPDnMM0llaxdCu+cG+3mmkJ5wKOUDlMHnXaHmGQW0FPGBlrlvos vn9A9eGtHRIdhc/lYRT1TuG+1VT1iFA+RW6PzOSsfQ7S8qx5VoOhRoFEjjSsS7+WBw BrUy+7XvQkQskjKcDZm7uEH/yxmkcziRgHy/ZaWI= Received: from [172.25.197.158] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.158]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 515, TLS: TLS1.0,256bits,RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA; Sat, 14 May 2011 13:15:26 +0200 id 00000000005DC048.000000004DCE644E.000023EF Message-ID: <4DCE644F.3070406@tana.it> Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 13:15:27 +0200 From: Alessandro Vesely User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: marf@ietf.org References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7B6F8C62-0C3B-4180-8F93-337D665BB736@blighty.com> In-Reply-To: <7B6F8C62-0C3B-4180-8F93-337D665BB736@blighty.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 11:15:32 -0000 On 13/May/11 20:05, Steve Atkins wrote: > On May 13, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Barry Leiba wrote: > >> Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the >> MARF working group: >> >>> Filename: draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback >>> Revision: 00 >>> Title: Email Feedback Report Type Value : not-spam >>> Creation date: 2011-05-13 >>> WG ID: Individual Submission >>> Number of pages: 7 >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback >>> report type value: "not-spam". It can be used to indicate that a >>> message that was tagged or categorized as spam (such as by an ISP) in >>> fact is not spam. >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback >> >> As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA >> SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general. We'd >> like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting >> it. +1 for adoption. >> It seems like an easy ride, I think. > > Probably. Seems harmless. A possible harm is inappropriate usage. IRC, "non-spam" used to be in ARF and was removed for this reason. I suggest to change the label to something more specific, such as "ham" (to highlight Bayesian training purposes), "reconsideration-request", or such. > Is this intended for communication between MUA and message store (doing > much the same thing as an IMAP move from spamfolder to inbox folder) > or is it something that's intended for broader use across administrative > boundaries (like, say, ISP pushback to Postini)? I hope so, because trusted authors deserve to come to know if their messages are misclassified, and have a chance to appeal. In this respect, the example in section 3 is described deceptively. Does it mean "Joe has _authored_ a message..."? The human readable part of the example does not say /why/ it is not spam. (Shouldn't it mention RFC 5965 rather than mipassoc's URL?) From jdfalk-lists@cybernothing.org Sun May 15 09:27:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EE2BE06CD for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 09:27:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gl5bCbdzm0ad for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 09:27:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ocelope.disgruntled.net (ocelope.disgruntled.net [97.107.131.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D62E068C for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 09:27:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.71] (99-62-240-209.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [99.62.240.209]) (authenticated bits=0) by ocelope.disgruntled.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p4FGRMtr029745 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 09:27:24 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.6.0 ocelope.disgruntled.net p4FGRMtr029745 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cybernothing.org; s=triac; t=1305476844; bh=uUUvahrMlb2Ts75NU0GsvcRGSGXQ3AF1FVaqFi4Bf Z4=; h=From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Subject:Date: Message-Id:To:Mime-Version; b=kZ/q3M/oHNJSR4NU/4ej7c/YsMH35vhG49jc VrQhJOnfoSlvRIo+DgY5x/AWJ+8HgWtFvD/ZxQENRFgDhwsr22ZyB01/OoskrMcK2fB rPS4rOJpHxKH1vMf8mGO5xVg1J4LnWTAElQdJ0hUjaYVY3rXuZg1x8FLs9I/3Gz68wP 0= From: "J.D. Falk" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 11:27:17 -0500 Message-Id: <1C806C86-8D87-4FC9-9A36-58BB22076AB7@cybernothing.org> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: [marf] draft-jdfalk-marf-as X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 16:27:26 -0000 Looks like a lot of MARF participants have been following the APPS area = thread about Applicability Statements, so I won't get into that except = to mention that they're described in RFC 2606 and have mostly been = forgotten. After conferring with our Chairs, I've written an Applicability = Statement for ARF which references the MAAWG BCP, and thus (I hope) can = fulfill our goals. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jdfalk-marf-as/ I've already noticed a couple of minor things I need to correct, but = I'll wait until there've been more comments before uploading another = version. What do y'all thank? -- J.D. Falk Return Path From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sun May 15 10:04:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3279DE06D6; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:04:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.546 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3HNhRjVPwKrm; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:04:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCAF8E06D4; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:04:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.54 Message-ID: <20110515170413.12512.40138.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 10:04:13 -0700 Cc: marf@ietf.org Subject: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 17:04:14 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Messaging Abuse Reporting Format Work= ing Group of the IETF. Title : Extensions to DKIM for Failure Reporting Author(s) : Murray S. Kucherawy Filename : draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02.txt Pages : 18 Date : 2011-05-15 This memo presents extensions to the DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) specification to allow for detailed reporting of message authentication failures in an on-demand fashion. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02.txt From msk@cloudmark.com Sun May 15 10:06:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF4A9E0681 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.775 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.775 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.177, BAYES_00=-2.599, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1C2SAnmtog1P for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38D0E06DF for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:11 -0700 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: "marf@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:09 -0700 Thread-Topic: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft Thread-Index: AcwRmjY2OKVqnNm3RvKxrf8AxA7RCAAAGrTwAGG8miA= Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_"; type="multipart/alternative" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 17:06:16 -0000 --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_" --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've posted draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02 which is largely the same as = -01 except it takes out all the SPF and ARF extension work which, as we dec= ided in Prague, should go in separate drafts. Please note the text I've added in the Introduction that describes this sui= te of documents which are ostensibly interdependent. The other two should = include the same or similar text (just as the five-part MIME series did). If the other authors would like the XML source for the -01 version to make = life easier, please let me know. The submission deadline for -00 drafts prior to the Quebec City conference = is Monday, July 4th. Ideally I'd like to see -00 versions well before then= , in time for the WG to see them and talk about any changes that need to be= made. Thanks, -MSK From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mur= ray S. Kucherawy Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:23 AM To: Hilda Fontana Cc: marf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft It's not "due", that's just when I'm planning to do dkim-reporting. Part of the effort, though, is to determine whether or not the group has en= ough momentum to meet at the next conference (July in Quebec City). So far= there doesn't appear to be much progress on anything, so I'm guessing not.= .. -MSK From: Hilda Fontana [mailto:hfontana@ecertsystems.com] Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:18 AM To: Murray S. Kucherawy Cc: marf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft I didn't realize it was due this weekend - Scott Tony? I don't think I'll = make this weekend On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy > wrote: I haven't heard back from any of the other document authors. Is this work = progressing? I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and = JD has posted his redaction BCP. Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you? -MSK From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-boun= ces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucheraw= y Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM To: marf@ietf.org Subject: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft The consensus at our IETF 80 meeting was to divide the DKIM reporting draft= into smaller documents. I believe the split should go as follows: - Defining the auth-failure report type (someone besides me should= take up authorship of this, but I'll do it if nobody steps up) - DKIM/ADSP extensions (I'll keep this one unless there's objectio= n) - SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered) - Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a new document o= r could become a chapter of the BCP document) I'll start work on the first two until someone takes the first one away fro= m me. Scott, please start working on a draft and post something when you'r= e ready; let us know if you need help with xml2rfc or suchlike. JD (and others), what's your view on the best location for the redaction te= xt? -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list marf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf -- Hilda L Fontana VP, Technology eCert, Inc. One Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105 p: 626.676.8852 f: 415.651.8932 [cid:image001.jpg@01CC12E7.5DAC4CA0] eCert - Trust the MessageTM www.ecertsystems.com ---------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is CONFIDENTIA= L and is intended only for the use of the addressee. Any unauthorized use, = disclosure, distribution, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited = and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibi= ted from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from makin= g any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received th= is e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and permanently delete the= e-mail, any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media a= nd destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments and any copies of suc= h printouts. Thank you for your cooperation. --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I’v= e posted draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-02 which is largely the same as -01= except it takes out all the SPF and ARF extension work which, as we decide= d in Prague, should go in separate drafts.

 

Pl= ease note the text I’ve added in the Introduction that describes this= suite of documents which are ostensibly interdependent.  The other tw= o should include the same or similar text (just as the five-part MIME serie= s did).

 <= /span>

If the other authors would like the X= ML source for the -01 version to make life easier, please let me know.=

 

The submission deadline for -00 drafts prior to t= he Quebec City conference is Monday, July 4th.  Ideally I&#= 8217;d like to see -00 versions well before then, in time for the WG to see= them and talk about any changes that need to be made.

 

Thanks,

-MSK

 

<= div style=3D'border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4= .0pt'>

From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:= marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent:<= /b> Friday, May 13, 2011 11:23 AM
To: Hilda Fontana
Cc:= marf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft<= o:p>

 

=

It’s not “due”, that’s = just when I’m planning to do dkim-reporting.


Part of the effort, though, is to determine wh= ether or not the group has enough momentum to meet at the next conference (= July in Quebec City).  So far there doesn’t appear to be much pr= ogress on anything, so I’m guessing not…

<= p class=3DMsoNormal> 

-MSK

 

From: Hilda Fontana = [mailto:hfontana@ecertsystems.com]
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11= :18 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: marf@ietf.org
= Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft

=

 

I didn't realize it was due this weekend - S= cott Tony?  I don't think I'll make this weekend

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy &l= t;msk@cloudmark.com> wrote:

I haven’t h= eard back from any of the other document authors.  Is this work progre= ssing?

I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this= weekend, and JD has posted his redaction BCP.

=  

Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you?

 

-MSK

 

From: marf-bounce= s@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. KucherawySent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM
To: marf@ietf.org
Subject:= [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft

 

The consensus at our IETF 80 meeti= ng was to divide the DKIM reporting draft into smaller documents.  I b= elieve the split should go as follows:

 

-     &nb= sp;    Defining the auth-failure report type (someone= besides me should take up authorship of this, but I’ll do it if nobo= dy steps up)

-  =         DKIM/ADSP extensions (I&#= 8217;ll keep this one unless there’s objection)

-       &nbs= p;  SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered)

=

-      &nb= sp;   Redaction BCP (JD Falk volunteered; this may be a ne= w document or could become a chapter of the BCP document)

 

I’ll start work on the first two unti= l someone takes the first one away from me.  Scott, please start worki= ng on a draft and post something when you’re ready; let us know if yo= u need help with xml2rfc or suchlike.

 

JD (and others), what’s your view on the best location fo= r the redaction text?

 

-MSK=


_______________________________________________marf mailing list
marf@ietf.org= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf




--

Hilda L Fontana

VP, Technology = ;

eCert, Inc.

O= ne Market Street, Suite 3600

= San Francisco, CA 94105

p: 626.676.8852

f:  415.651.8932

 

3D"Image

 

eCert - = Trust the MessageTM 

 

----------------------------------------

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

 

The information contained in this e-mail a= nd any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and is intended only for the use of the = addressee. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, dissemination, o= r copying is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the in= tended recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail= or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If= you believe you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immed= iately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies f= rom any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or = attachments and any copies of such printouts. Thank you for your cooperatio= n.

 

 

= = --_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_-- --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_ Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="image001.jpg" Content-Description: image001.jpg Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.jpg"; size=377; creation-date="Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:10 GMT"; modification-date="Sun, 15 May 2011 10:06:10 GMT" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAYABgAAD/2wBDAAoHBwgHBgoICAgLCgoLDhgQDg0NDh0VFhEYIx8lJCIf IiEmKzcvJik0KSEiMEExNDk7Pj4+JS5ESUM8SDc9Pjv/wAALCAAnAGABAREA/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEB AQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1Fh ByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkKFhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZ WmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXG x8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oACAEBAAA/APZqKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK//9k= --_004_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F134331A4FEEXCHC2corpclo_-- From jdfalk-lists@cybernothing.org Sun May 15 11:14:25 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE0EE0674 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 11:14:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dFIYwRj5kfV6 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 11:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ocelope.disgruntled.net (ocelope.disgruntled.net [97.107.131.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B698E0651 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 11:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.71] (99-62-240-209.lightspeed.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [99.62.240.209]) (authenticated bits=0) by ocelope.disgruntled.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p4FIELSk031166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 11:14:23 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.6.0 ocelope.disgruntled.net p4FIELSk031166 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cybernothing.org; s=triac; t=1305483263; bh=whLKFhgABfIfieTXcZZMVn6tYOOAxGvBj/BBnq7PL H8=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=CvttRx4sWiFB 5ozZ9tYnIgCz0RMq28J7pgxlmDfQSsa3ylmBBuN+wzYwxzK7XMX5c5kF2QpcNmsPH9u RQAl3AiANO/nO+fdkGSIXW5Ml3xs4GPlLCRRycc+CXpy7XphPlbACIF8uMTVi9G1igm fYtvadvBYYG9JQZ9e9AXTt9Ik= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: "J.D. Falk" In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 13:14:16 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:14:25 -0000 On May 13, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback I agree that this fits nicely into the MARF WG. The main comment I have on the document is that I think it needs a minor = shift in attitude. Statements like "It can be used to report a message = that was mistakenly marked as spam" sound very certain, and that carries = with it an expectation that the report will be acted upon. I'm aware of four anti-spam systems which use "not spam" feedback today: = Yahoo! Mail, Vipul's Razor, Cloudmark, and GMail. (I worked on the = first from 2004-2007.) All of them take the "not spam" reports, and mix = them with spam reports and other data using a proprietary algorithm. In = no case is a "not spam" report an immediate, automatic override. (This differs from the "not spam" button in some MUAs, where it /can/ be = an override -- but only for that individual user. For example, the = Yahoo! Mail MUA does this.) The document does acknowledge that anti-spam systems can and should make = their own decision (in sections 1.1 and 4), but I think that needs to be = spelled out more clearly to avoid creating inappropriate expectations. This proposal also brings up the more general question of feedback from = an MUA to the user's mailbox provider, which I think would be a = wonderful topic for an Applicability Statement. But first, someone = needs to actually implement it and try it out. -- J.D. Falk the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions From sklist@kitterman.com Mon May 16 06:31:30 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE02E071C for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:31:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w3Y02ftTxhS7 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout00.controlledmail.com (mailout00.controlledmail.com [72.81.252.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91867E0665 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout00.controlledmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout00.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685D838C134; Mon, 16 May 2011 09:31:28 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=kitterman.com; s=2007-00; t=1305552688; bh=DsC/3JuVcw9hK8NfO6TR3f16cQSJNLMm/MXqhS4D6wE=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id; b=HJJeupR9IyMFLd+baFqaxFvT/0JnH58padGmTbypTnFo2mQxHn6byksbGMa6Mq9Lp D5xOuPWCYwlFOaw4psZsffJBCDAJSIzLo6/nPDFGWtBzre4hlIiqYmQlB3kh5q4NK3 Inq3m5fZnzk21v6Zb8FkLRSdGsvfIQQTnYWSkWKA= From: Scott Kitterman To: marf@ietf.org Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 09:31:27 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-8-generic-pae; KDE/4.6.2; i686; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201105160931.27444.sklist@kitterman.com> X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Subject: Re: [marf] Split of dkim-reporting draft X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 13:31:30 -0000 On Friday, May 13, 2011 01:41:03 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > I haven't heard back from any of the other document authors. Is this work > progressing? > > I expect to have the reduced dkim-reporting draft posted this weekend, and > JD has posted his redaction BCP. > > Scott, Tony, Hilda, any updates from you? ... > Murray S. Kucherawy Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:52 AM ... > - SPF extensions (Scott Kitterman volunteered) ... I've got your common base document to start from and xml2rfc installed and working, but no actual progress yet. I should be able to have something late this week or early next for review. Scott K From bmcdowell@paypal-inc.com Wed May 25 14:06:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09EB4E0703 for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 14:06:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.117 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.117 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX=1.482, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jKNac7zMEg-6 for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 14:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from den-mipot-001.corp.ebay.com (den-mipot-001.corp.ebay.com [216.113.175.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 499D5E06E5 for ; Wed, 25 May 2011 14:06:16 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: s=ppinc; d=paypal-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-EBay-Corp:X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received:From:To:CC: Date:Subject:Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Message-ID: References:In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:acceptlanguage: x-ems-proccessed:x-ems-stamp:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:X-CFilter; b=Kyqq4aYzR4ezfitXk51qyHDoLxDteeLQg1TgoH7muaCxsKXctq+5RZK2 BilvjcD63Tizq1DiA7GT6G5YJ3CAoZTAOC/W8Jcm/sgSNvKvjUciflyB9 SizfCkR/MzF8nZk; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paypal-inc.com; i=bmcdowell@paypal-inc.com; q=dns/txt; s=ppinc; t=1306357576; x=1337893576; h=from:to:cc:date:subject:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=fZtxjnERd9kql3VdQec49LHFpbSRaVIHwJhtIu9UmBc=; b=LoX8kZSSCjmGrlvIkebTZGx4sS46skhO7lARBSJs6WnRL0Bhsr80wokF YUkhFrBJq5NF6gq3WtiAz/q/LB49FaCJXqckmpoplZb/vOFu4Ury++hRF /79R2ldIiCfawIS; X-EBay-Corp: Yes X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,268,1304319600"; d="scan'208";a="2182066" Received: from den-vtenf-002.corp.ebay.com (HELO DEN-MEXHT-002.corp.ebay.com) ([10.101.112.213]) by den-mipot-001.corp.ebay.com with ESMTP; 25 May 2011 14:06:15 -0700 Received: from DEN-MEXMS-001.corp.ebay.com ([10.241.16.225]) by DEN-MEXHT-002.corp.ebay.com ([10.241.17.53]) with mapi; Wed, 25 May 2011 15:06:15 -0600 From: "McDowell, Brett" To: Barry Leiba Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 15:06:13 -0600 Thread-Topic: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt Thread-Index: AcwbH5UYupePfgEJTPC01wZN/VFg/Q== Message-ID: <8F170FBC-489E-448C-8DFC-7EF0B9578A5E@paypal-inc.com> References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US x-ems-proccessed: 10SqDH0iR7ekR7SRpKqm5A== x-ems-stamp: ndiuyqFS2pu+h7zm+cRyxQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter: Scanned Cc: Message Abuse Report Format working group Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 21:06:17 -0000 I haven't been particularly active for a long time, but I just wanted to co= nvey support for adopting this draft and supporting the harmonization/conve= rgence of ARF and SpamRep. Barry, how would you feel about updating the example to show a message that= was compliant with one of the Security Considerations recommendations... l= ike maybe a DKIM signature on the message? -- Brett On May 13, 2011, at 1:57 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: > Kepeng Li and I have just submitted a draft for consideration by the > MARF working group: >=20 >> Filename: draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback >> Revision: 00 >> Title: Email Feedback Report Type Value : not-spam >> Creation date: 2011-05-13 >> WG ID: Individual Submission >> Number of pages: 7 >>=20 >> Abstract: >> This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback >> report type value: "not-spam". It can be used to indicate that a >> message that was tagged or categorized as spam (such as by an ISP) in >> fact is not spam. >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback >=20 > As noted in the draft the requirement for this comes from the OMA > SpamRep folks, and also seems like a reasonable need in general. We'd > like the MARF working group to review this, and to consider adopting > it. It seems like an easy ride, I think. >=20 > Murray will handle all chair responsibilities for this if it's > adopted, since I'm a co-author. >=20 > Barry, as participant > _______________________________________________ > marf mailing list > marf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf From barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Sat May 28 18:33:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D2BE0684 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.195, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NKtrV7pC7OLm for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCCFE0657 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gwb20 with SMTP id 20so1577813gwb.31 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=EPFVAfovio14YHm8k7YLfPTd58cdU83kgXUMD/W0qSI=; b=I74Gqh58KffcvPmbINunn1P2LzMtTKMYmAUAr03vmxvSynvU7pKfqL+EuUwVplANqb 0tIW+ULpn9+Ul/dueo0LLgjX3g+YbTY+h0I8WQmLHP6iZshfobhcuMMDLlC4dduqfT31 Pu5mlkM+NIGPx1nhwHFPzw51pXzYJHSllhA1A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=OowTGRePEOLC9X5yIC2athIeEuhnzMEZITYLKIyt+M+G3QkXrA11W+tqISKVKOu0tT 5X/PMA0XWgoCxt3TiFQyujczwsrNfHgVsNsh3lWD9JmAXZJT5PMtXsMF3XZHvRmL4Ppc aGi+T/Rnd0G0CZczQ7dhpaH2AiGto2pqrx8kE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.146.159.34 with SMTP id h34mr3107605yae.24.1306632808607; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.147.99.12 with HTTP; Sat, 28 May 2011 18:33:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8F170FBC-489E-448C-8DFC-7EF0B9578A5E@paypal-inc.com> References: <20110513174637.20348.26696.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8F170FBC-489E-448C-8DFC-7EF0B9578A5E@paypal-inc.com> Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 01:33:28 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: QJZ-IlxlT0TY5QIRrJRTRcUEwA4 Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Message Abuse Report Format working group Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification for draft-li-marf-not-spam-feedback-00.txt X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 01:33:29 -0000 Thanks, folks, for the comments. Steve: It is intended for use across boundaries, and can certainly be used internally as well. It's intended for exactly the same use that the base MARF report types are. Alessandro and JD: Yes, there's certainly the case that "not-spam" reports can't be just taken at face value if that would cause them to affect the filtering for other users. We'll put some more into the next version of the draft to make that more explicit. I don't think we want to change the name of the report, though -- just the documentation. Brett: Yes, I'm always happy to change or add examples, and I generally believe that more examples improve most documents. I'll change the example, or add a new one (or ones), as you suggest. I'll have a chair chat with Murray, and then post a new version at his direction. Barry