[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

Bron Gondwana wrote in <62b953a7-5168-45ab-8bec-f77c709b9...@app.fastmail.com>: |On Wed, Nov 20, 2024, at 08:15, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |> that goes out without MIME as such (text/plain 7-bit content-type |> is optional), but both of these two messages came in via ML as |> |> Content-Type

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

On 19 Nov 2024, at 14:13, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/19/2024 2:09 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote: >> the DKIM "brand" is already somewhat known, and this new thing will serve >> the same purpose for them - and require them to do the same thing (set up a >> handful of DNS entries). > > > However... > >

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

On 11/19/2024 2:43 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: I’ll note that we put a v=1 tag/value pair in DKIM signatures, so at least at the time we had imagined that we might do something that isn’t exactly DKIMv1 and still want to call it DKIM. Version numbers, inside a protocol, are a common feature.  I belie

[Ietf-dkim] Re: PROPOSAL: reopen this working group and work on DKIM2

On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:04 AM Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/6/2024 6:54 PM, Wei Chuang wrote: > > signed recipient > > Small request for clarification: > > I'm not familiar with this term. And the 'strong protections' paper you > cite does not seem to use it. > > Since recipients don't do the si

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024, at 08:15, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > that goes out without MIME as such (text/plain 7-bit content-type > is optional), but both of these two messages came in via ML as > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Yeah, if the source me

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:23 AM Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/17/2024 2:19 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote: > > Regarding the question of "is this DKIMbis or something bigger"? It's > something bigger than just tweaks to DKIM. > > The choice of the name "DKIM2" is partially branding, and partially > becau

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024, at 09:13, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/19/2024 2:09 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote: > > the DKIM "brand" is already somewhat known, and this new thing will > > serve the same purpose for them - and require them to do the same > > thing (set up a handful of DNS entries). > > > Howe

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

Hello. Bron Gondwana wrote in <8361f17f-aaf0-4f8e-a1c0-2ec99911b...@app.fastmail.com>: |On Tue, Nov 19, 2024, at 12:14, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |> I wondered for myself how the bsdiff algorithm would work out for |> such things. | |This is basically the bsdiff algorithm, but with the synta

[Ietf-dkim] Re: PROPOSAL: reopen this working group and work on DKIM2

On 11/20/24 06:43, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:11 AM Dave Crocker wrote: On 11/6/2024 6:54 PM, Wei Chuang wrote: "message algebra " This topic has been a point of fas

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

On 11/20/24 12:03, Richard Clayton wrote: In message <58825b2d-2eb9-6306-c721-fb4b95c15...@crash.com>, Steven M Jones writes > If I follow this, the use case is a Secure Email Gateway or SEG, to use a > Gartner-ism, and is likely the last hop before delivery to the recipient ADMD or > mailst

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message <20241120023021.wVeiagjR@steffen%sdaoden.eu>, Steffen Nurpmeso writes > |>i responded to Richard > |>Clayton's message > |> > |> jszrijbynuonf...@highwayman.com > |> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/1ZCF-h9rHsL2YT3lTgo_qm

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

On 11/19/2024 2:09 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote: the DKIM "brand" is already somewhat known, and this new thing will serve the same purpose for them - and require them to do the same thing (set up a handful of DNS entries). However... It is a different and incompatible protocol.  It is not DKIM.

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

On 11/19/24 00:25, Wei Chuang wrote: On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 2:20 PM Bron Gondwana wrote: And I do agree there needs to be a way to say "I made changes, and I'm not telling you how to undo them" as well. +1.  My belief is that security gateways are a particularly complex case that

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message <58825b2d-2eb9-6306-c721-fb4b95c15...@crash.com>, Steven M Jones writes >If I follow this, the use case is a Secure Email Gateway or SEG, to use a >Gartner-ism, and is likely the last hop before delivery to the recipient ADMD >or >mails

[Ietf-dkim] Re: PROPOSAL: reopen this working group and work on DKIM2

On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:11 AM Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/6/2024 6:54 PM, Wei Chuang wrote: > > "message algebra > > " > > This topic has been a point of fascination for some years. It is, indeed, > attractive

[Ietf-dkim] Re: [Emailcore] Re: Charter: DKIMbis or a new thing

--On Monday, November 18, 2024 21:21 +0100 Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: >... > It is unfortunate that SMTP, please let me add emailcore@, has > several codes for disk full etc, but no possibility for a 5xx > regarding failed authorization etc, so that people have to use > "554" for *anything*. >...

[Ietf-dkim] Re: Should we be recording all modifications

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message <20241119211503.2_KbB0O0@steffen%sdaoden.eu>, Steffen Nurpmeso writes >i responded to Richard >Clayton's message > > jszrijbynuonf...@highwayman.com > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/1ZCF-h9rHsL2YT3lTgo_qmIpVGE > >which s