Resolution of The SPF and Sender ID Experiments
draft-ietf-spfbis-experiment-08
The information below is for an old version of the document |
Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (spfbis WG)
|
|
Author |
|
Murray Kucherawy
|
|
Last updated |
|
2012-05-10
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-kucherawy-spfbis-experiment
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
Informational
|
|
Formats |
|
pdf
htmlized (tools)
htmlized
bibtex
|
|
Reviews |
|
|
Stream |
WG state
|
|
In WG Last Call
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
S Moonesamy
|
IESG |
IESG state |
|
AD is watching
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
Pete Resnick
|
|
Send notices to |
|
spfbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-spfbis-experiment@tools.ietf.org
|
SPFBIS Working Group M. Kucherawy
Internet-Draft Cloudmark
Intended status: Informational May 10, 2012
Expires: November 11, 2012
Resolution of The SPF and Sender ID Experiments
draft-ietf-spfbis-experiment-08
Abstract
In 2006 the IETF published a suite of protocol documents comprising
SPF and Sender ID, two proposed email authentication protocols. Both
of these protocols enable one to publish via the Domain Name System a
policy declaring which mail servers were authorized to send email on
behalf of the domain name being queried. There was concern that the
two would conflict in some significant operational situations,
interfering with message delivery.
The IESG required the publication of all of these documents (RFC4405,
RFC4406, RFC4407, and RFC4408) with Experimental status, and
requested that the community observe deployment and operation of the
protocols over a period of two years from the date of publication to
determine a reasonable path forward.
After six years, sufficient experience and evidence have been
collected that the experiments thus created can be considered
concluded. This document presents those findings.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 11, 2012.
Copyright Notice
Kucherawy Expires November 11, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SPF/Sender ID Experiments May 2012
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Evidence of Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. DNS Resource Record Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. The SUBMITTER SMTP Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Evidence of Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. Background on the RRTYPE Issue . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix B. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Kucherawy Expires November 11, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SPF/Sender ID Experiments May 2012
1. Introduction
In April 2006, the IETF published the [SPF] and Sender ID email
authentication protocols, the latter consisting of three documents
([SUBMITTER], [SENDER-ID], and [PRA]). Both of these protocols
enable one to publish via the Domain Name System a policy declaring
which mail servers are authorized to send email on behalf of the
selected domain name. There was concern that the two would conflict
in some significant operational situations, interfering with message
delivery.
Consensus did not clearly support one protocol over the other, and
there was significant concern that the two would conflict in some
Show full document text