On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 8:02 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <superu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 6:58 PM Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > >> FWIW, I'm not arguing against this. I just don't understand the urgency, >> and why the urgency is now... urgent. I think we are owed an explanation, >> and experimental data would be extremely useful to justify it. >> > I don't get the impression that it's suddenly urgent, but rather there's > suddenly a community of people ready to develop and deploy it as part of a > package of other solutions, as described in the charter. The point is to > capture the momentum. > To expand on that point, this is coming up now because the ideas represented by the motivation draft <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gondwana-dkim2-motivation/> and algebra draft <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gondwana-dkim2-modification-alegbra/> got written up. The replay and backscatter have always been there but AFAIK never been fixed by repairing the specification. In particular the replay problem has been known since the RFC6376 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6376#section-8.6> (section 8.6) was published in 2011. As I understand it, it remained latent for many years, but in 2022 became particularly problematic. It was mitigated to a degree since then though through a patchwork of techniques, but having a thorough solution will help everyone in the long run. Recall there was a prior WG in 2023 effort to tackle replay that failed due to a lack of participation by the community. After that, industry got together to try to build a core group that could sustain momentum to fix this and that resulted in these drafts. Perhaps it's a sign that folks in industry from many different companies can come together on this. -Wei
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
