I think this is getting close to ready, so I would appreciate it if people here would review the draft and provide comments: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting/?include_text=1 Thanks. Scott K
Long ago, Nostradamus foresaw that on 02/03/2012 05:33 PM, Scott Kitterman would write: > I think this is getting close to ready, so I would appreciate it if people > here would review the draft and provide comments: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting/?include_text=1 > Shouldn't the spec mention explicitly that the requested "report" should be a DSN? This is implied by mentioning DSN in security considerations, and including DSN in the informative links. But I found myself thinking the whole time while reading the spec, "so what format are the reports in?"
On Sunday, February 05, 2012 08:19:28 PM you wrote: > Long ago, Nostradamus foresaw that on 02/03/2012 05:33 PM, Scott > > Kitterman would write: > > I think this is getting close to ready, so I would appreciate it if > > people here would review the draft and provide comments: > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting/?include_t > > ext=1 > Shouldn't the spec mention explicitly that the requested "report" should > be a DSN? This is implied by mentioning DSN in security considerations, > and including DSN in the informative links. But I found myself thinking > the whole time while reading the spec, "so what format are the reports in?" This is in many respects similar to a DSN (so the considerations are simlar), but it's not a DSN, it's an ARF. This is clarified in the drafts that go with this: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-marf-as/ http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-marf-authfailure-report/ Thanks for reviewing. Scott K
iMail News Gateway Server v3.1
(c) Copyright 1996-2005 Santronics Software, Inc.
Mail Forum Statistics
Date Range : 08 Feb 2012 - 01 Jan 1601
Report Date: 11 Feb 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Summary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Forums : 2
Total Messages : 5
Total Participants : 4
Total Vendor Postings : 0
Total Mail/No Replies : 1 (20%)
6+ Days Old : 0 4+ Days Old: 0
2+ Days Old : 1 1 Day Old : 0
Busiest Posting Hour : 0am (1 msgs)
Busiest Posting Day : Thursday (4 msgs)
+-[ Hourly Posting Pattern ]----------------------+
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
| * * * * * |
(Continue reading)There's a new SPF related authentication protocol called DMARC that's just been announced. It builds on SPF and DKIM to use their complementary failure mechanisms and define feedback mechanisms so senders can QA their SPF and DKIM deployments. I've added some references to the SPF site: http://www.openspf.net/News/2012-01-30 http://www.openspf.net/Best_Practices/Integration Scott K
iMail News Gateway Server v3.1
(c) Copyright 1996-2005 Santronics Software, Inc.
Mail Forum Statistics
Date Range : 23 Feb 2012 - 01 Jan 1601
Report Date: 25 Feb 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Summary:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Forums : 2
Total Messages : 6
Total Participants : 3
Total Vendor Postings : 0
Total Mail/No Replies : 2 (33%)
6+ Days Old : 0 4+ Days Old: 0
2+ Days Old : 0 1 Day Old : 2
Busiest Posting Hour : 1pm (2 msgs)
Busiest Posting Day : Thursday (4 msgs)
+-[ Hourly Posting Pattern ]----------------------+
| * * |
| * * |
| * * |
| * * |
| * * |
| * * * * |
| * * * * |
| * * * * |
(Continue reading)
Scott Kitterman wrote: > There's a new SPF related authentication protocol called DMARC that's just > been announced. It builds on SPF and DKIM to use their complementary failure > mechanisms and define feedback mechanisms so senders can QA their SPF and DKIM > deployments. > > I've added some references to the SPF site: > > http://www.openspf.net/News/2012-01-30 > > http://www.openspf.net/Best_Practices/Integration > > Scott K Just a quick pass review: + I like some of the basic ideas, touching base with some of the goals found in DSAP (DKIM Signature Authorization Protocol), and also concept using past frameworks where essentially Domain/Host Information and Operational information is exposed under a single namespace. + I like the anchor with RFC5322 Author Domain, always thought that was important. Major plus. - Complexity will be a factor for wide/quick adoption. A true widely endorsed standard begins when even "mom & pop" to small businesses can easily get on board, similar to what SPF offered.(Continue reading)
All, just a quick notice: A couple of months ago the SPF project's website at <http://www.openspf.org> went down and got temporarily replaced with a copy at <http://www.openspf.net>. We have now managed to restore the site under the original domain, openspf.org. -Julian
FYI, in case anyone wants to comment. -----Original Message----- From: marf-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 6:59 AM To: IETF-Announce Cc: marf <at> ietf.org Subject: [marf] Last Call: <draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-08.txt> (SPF Authentication Failure Reporting using the Abuse Report Format) to Proposed Standard The IESG has received a request from the Messaging Abuse Reporting Format WG (marf) to consider the following document: - 'SPF Authentication Failure Reporting using the Abuse Report Format' <draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-08.txt> as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf <at> ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-03-14. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg <at> ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract This memo presents extensions to the Abuse Reporting Format (ARF), and Sender Policy Framework (SPF) specifications to allow for detailed reporting of message authentication failures in an on-demand fashion. This memo updates RFC4408 by providing an IANA registry for SPF modifiers.(Continue reading)
RSS Feed31 | |
|---|---|
50 | |
4 | |
9 | |
15 | |
14 | |
24 | |
26 | |
16 | |
50 | |
4 | |
2 | |
5 | |
2 | |
4 | |
30 | |
16 | |
2 | |
13 | |
5 | |
13 | |
1 | |
3 | |
7 | |
7 | |
34 | |
11 | |
32 | |
83 | |
9 | |
5 | |
109 | |
9 | |
46 | |
3 | |
5 | |
3 | |
96 | |
7 | |
4 | |
69 | |
15 | |
33 | |
48 | |
9 | |
5 | |
39 | |
49 | |
83 | |
227 | |
151 | |
21 | |
16 | |
7 | |
26 | |
28 | |
53 | |
124 | |
182 | |
114 | |
614 | |
179 | |
348 | |
153 | |
88 | |
170 | |
110 | |
190 | |
209 | |
105 | |
223 | |
388 | |
258 | |
192 | |
354 | |
119 | |
441 | |
804 | |
741 | |
837 | |
896 | |
305 | |
631 | |
442 | |
289 | |
877 | |
1440 | |
1327 | |
1028 | |
1263 | |
1128 | |
1341 | |
656 | |
496 | |
623 | |
956 | |
1511 | |
519 | |
196 | |
519 | |
8 |
