IETF conflict review for draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl
conflict-review-vesely-authmethod-dnswl-00
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2019-12-23
|
00 | Amy Vezza | The following approval message was sent From: The IESG To: Adrian Farrel , draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl@ietf.org, rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org Cc: IETF-Announce , … The following approval message was sent From: The IESG To: Adrian Farrel , draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl@ietf.org, rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org Cc: IETF-Announce , The IESG , iana@iana.org Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl-13 The IESG has completed a review of draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl-13 consistent with RFC5742. The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'DNSWL Email Authentication Method Extension' as an Informational RFC. The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in DMARC WG, but this relationship does not prevent publishing. The IESG would also like the Independent Submissions Editor to review the comments in the datatracker related to this document and determine whether or not they merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and the history log. The IESG review is documented at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-vesely-authmethod-dnswl/ A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vesely-authmethod-dnswl/ The process for such documents is described at https://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html Thank you, The IESG Secretary |
2019-12-23
|
00 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the conflict review response |
2019-12-23
|
00 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2019-12-23
|
00 | Amy Vezza | Conflict Review State changed to Approved No Problem - announcement sent from Approved No Problem - announcement to be sent |
2019-12-23
|
00 | Amy Vezza | Conflict Review State changed to Approved No Problem - announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation |
2019-12-19
|
00 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Magnus Westerlund |
2019-12-19
|
00 | Éric Vyncke | [Ballot comment] I entered a "no objection" ballot about the **CONFLICT** to other IETF WG BUT, I have several non-blocking questions on the **DOCUMENT itself**... … [Ballot comment] I entered a "no objection" ballot about the **CONFLICT** to other IETF WG BUT, I have several non-blocking questions on the **DOCUMENT itself**... All in section 1, in this paragraph: " The DNS [RFC1034] lookup is based on the connecting client's IP address, IPv4 or IPv6, and returns zero or more A records. The latter are IPv4 IP addresses in the range 127/8." First, using a legacy IPv4 address to convey semantics in A RR looks really weird to me. Why not using TXT record only? Not to mention that using a A RR in 2019, seems, well... outdated. Finally, it is not clear to me in how the look up is done... Is it a reverse-DNS loopkup? or prefixing the IP address to a well-known DNS suffix ? Without this information, I am afraid that the document is not really useful. Regards -éric |
2019-12-19
|
00 | Éric Vyncke | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Éric Vyncke |
2019-12-18
|
00 | Benjamin Kaduk | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Benjamin Kaduk has been changed to Yes from No Record |
2019-12-18
|
00 | Benjamin Kaduk | [Ballot comment] The conflict review response is good. A note on the document from while skimming: "interprocess communication on 127.0.0.1" may be needlessly IPv4-centric, and … [Ballot comment] The conflict review response is good. A note on the document from while skimming: "interprocess communication on 127.0.0.1" may be needlessly IPv4-centric, and the security properties of it do depend on the context in which it's used. |
2019-12-18
|
00 | Benjamin Kaduk | Ballot comment text updated for Benjamin Kaduk |
2019-12-18
|
00 | Roman Danyliw | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Roman Danyliw |
2019-12-17
|
00 | Adam Roach | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adam Roach |
2019-12-17
|
00 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2019-12-16
|
00 | Alvaro Retana | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana |
2019-12-16
|
00 | Martin Vigoureux | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Vigoureux |
2019-12-15
|
00 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Barry Leiba |
2019-12-12
|
00 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard |
2019-12-05
|
00 | Amy Vezza | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2019-12-19 |
2019-12-05
|
00 | Alexey Melnikov | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alexey Melnikov |
2019-12-05
|
00 | Alexey Melnikov | Created "Approve" ballot |
2019-12-05
|
00 | Alexey Melnikov | Conflict Review State changed to IESG Evaluation from AD Review |
2019-12-05
|
00 | Alexey Melnikov | New version available: conflict-review-vesely-authmethod-dnswl-00.txt |
2019-12-03
|
00 | Alissa Cooper | Conflict Review State changed to AD Review from Needs Shepherd |
2019-12-03
|
00 | Alissa Cooper | Shepherding AD changed to Alexey Melnikov |
2019-12-02
|
00 | Alissa Cooper | Removed from agenda for telechat |
2019-11-28
|
00 | Amy Vezza | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2019-12-05 |
2019-11-28
|
00 | Adrian Farrel | IETF conflict review requested |