SMTP TLS Reporting
draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-03

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (uta WG)
Last updated 2017-02-15
Replaces draft-brotman-smtp-tlsrpt
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Using TLS in Applications                                    D. Margolis
Internet-Draft                                               Google, Inc
Intended status: Standards Track                              A. Brotman
Expires: August 19, 2017                                    Comcast, Inc
                                                         B. Ramakrishnan
                                                             Yahoo!, Inc
                                                                J. Jones
                                                          Microsoft, Inc
                                                               M. Risher
                                                             Google, Inc
                                                       February 15, 2017

                           SMTP TLS Reporting
                     draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-03

Abstract

   A number of protocols exist for establishing encrypted channels
   between SMTP Mail Transfer Agents, including STARTTLS [RFC3207], DANE
   [RFC6698], and SMTP MTA STS (TODO: Add ref).  These protocols can
   fail due to misconfiguration or active attack, leading to undelivered
   messages or delivery over unencrypted or unauthenticated channels.
   This document describes a reporting mechanism and format by which
   sending systems can share statistics and specific information about
   potential failures with recipient domains.  Recipient domains can
   then use this information to both detect potential attackers and
   diagnose unintentional misconfigurations.

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 August 19, 2017.

Margolis, et al.         Expires August 19, 2017                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                 SMTP-TLSRPT                 February 2017

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
     1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Related Technologies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Reporting Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Example Reporting Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.1.1.  Report using MAILTO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.1.2.  Report using HTTPS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Reporting Schema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Report Time-frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Delivery Summary  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.2.1.  Success Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.2.2.  Failure Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.3.  Result Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.3.1.  Routing Failures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.3.2.  Negotiation Failures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.3.3.  Policy Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       4.3.4.  General Failures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       4.3.5.  Transient Failures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Report Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.1.  Report Filename . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.2.  Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.3.  Email Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.4.  HTTPS Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.5.  Delivery Retry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
Show full document text