On Fri 12/Sep/2025 22:35:14 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:15 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
I've also added two tentative subsection under IANA Considerations.
Although I got no feedback on this, something needs to be done if that
IANA page is to appear credible.>
On the assumption that we do want to do this (more on that below), there's
stuff missing like what registration policy you want that registry to have,
what valid values are for "Status" and what those values mean, possible
instructions for a designated expert, etc. See the process laid out in RFC
8126.
Hmm, it seems there's no bonus to defining a new registry on a page where
registration procedures and experts are already defined. Not only does the I-D
have to repeat these details, but it also needs to specify that the registry
should be grouped there. Well, it's not overly difficult; I can do it...
But I'm wondering if this needs a registry.
Good question. I didn't find a section on worthiness in RFC 8126.
My assessment is that Auth-Failure has a list of fixed values, extended by this
document. The list appears incomplete (for example, keynotfound is missing).
Most other fixed values for message feedback fields are referenced on the same
IANA page. Considering that extending an extension has caused difficulties
even in this list, and that there is confusion among the various types of
reports, perhaps adding this registry could make the whole picture a bit clearer.
That list has not been updated since RFC 6591 was published. If it's
rarely, if ever, extended, then is it enough to just say "This document
updates 6591" and "Here's the new list" rather than making something almost-
static for IANA to manage?
The draft already states that it updates 6591, so yes, a developer can go that
route[*]. DKIM2 provides for various levels of failure, since changes will be
undoable; perhaps it will define new failure types accordingly?
Evaluating the costs and benefits of a new registry is beyond my ability. What
does the WG think?
Best
Ale
--
[*] I'm going to amend bullet 3 of Section 4, as it currently doesn't say
"auth-failure", thus hindering keyword searches.
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
