Subject: [I18ndir] Request for review: draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02

From: "Alexey Melnikov" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:59:42 -0500

Dear I18N Directorate members,
draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02 will soon start IETF LC. I would like a quick sanity check that it doesn't say anything wrong from I18N point of view. (A reviewer familiar with EAI, SMTP, DKIM/SPF/DMARC would be ideal).

Thank you,
Alexey

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:08:19 -0500

Alexey,

I'm happy to have a look at that document when I have time, but
the odds that I will have time while discussions of
draft-falstrom-unicode11 and closely related issues are
continuing in the directorate are quite low.  I also don't claim
significant familiarity with DKIM/SPF/DMARC (or the work on
successors to the latter that are apparently now in progress),
so, if there is someone here who is thoroughly familiar with
them as well as SMTPUTF8 (EAI was just the name of a WG) and
SMTP, he or she may be better qualified than I am.

Also, just as a heads-up: after several discussions with various
people who have tried to deploy SMTPUTF8, I've been working
intermittently on some recommendations about restrictions that
mail service operators might impose in themselves that would be
likely to make things easier and more interoperable.  The draft
will be intended as an Applicability Statement with
recommendations as to what to do and not do and not a
substantive modification/update to the SMTPUTF8 specifications
as now written.

The priority I'm going to give to getting it done will be
significantly affected by whether there appears to be a path to
have it reviewed and published.  If you have advice on the
latter, I'd appreciate it.  

Because I haven't studied draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02, I don't
know if there are likely interactions although, if
draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth is capable of addressing all cases
allowed by the SMTPUTF8 specs, the possible new recommendations
are unlikely to have any effect.

best,
   john

--On Wednesday, February 27, 2019 08:59 -0500 Alexey Melnikov
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02 will soon start IETF LC. I would
> like a quick sanity check that it doesn't say anything wrong
> from I18N point of view. (A reviewer familiar with EAI, SMTP,
> DKIM/SPF/DMARC would be ideal).
> 
> Thank you,
> Alexey

---

From: "Pete Resnick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:19:45 -0600

John,

As we chatted about before, I think your time is much better spent 
advising folks doing reviews rather than doing the reviews yourself. 
Peter and/or I will find someone to assign to this review (I think 
Harald gets a pass ;-) ), and I'd hope you can help out as needed.

Cheers,

pr

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:09:56 -0500

Pete,

Understood and appreciated.   But I was talking about reading
(or even skimming) the document and familiarizing myself
sufficiently with its context to be able to even advise on a
review.  That would be true even if all I needed to understand
about the document itself could be fed to me in an elevator talk
or was covered in the Abstract.   It might have been too subtle,
but I actually didn't say "write a review".  Instead,
deliberately, and mindful of your suggestion, I said "look at
that document".

FWIW, I'm not going to take the time to go back and review the
list of members of the directorate who have sat out the
discussions of the last few weeks but my recollection is that,
if there is a requirement for the broad understanding of i18n
issues and in-depth understanding of SMTPUTF8 (EAI) and SMTP
issues, the list of candidates is rather short and gets,
percentage-wise, much shorter if you cross Harald and myself
off.  I note that your message doesn't say "I, Pete Resnick,
have the needed knowledge and will lead the review" and that may
make the list even shorter.   If one adds a requirement for
in-depth understanding of DKIM/SPF/DMARC specs and surrounding
issues, I suspect the number may go to zero or one and that
really limits the utility of the directorate as a place to
discuss issues, learn from each other, and form a joint
understanding (as distinguished from a "review team" passing a
short straw or other token around).

    best,
      john

--On Wednesday, February 27, 2019 14:19 -0600 Pete Resnick
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> John,
> 
> As we chatted about before, I think your time is much better
> spent advising folks doing reviews rather than doing the
> reviews yourself. Peter and/or I will find someone to assign
> to this review (I think Harald gets a pass ;-) ), and I'd hope
> you can help out as needed.

---

From: Martin J. Dürst <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:55:26 +0000

Hello Alex, others,

I'll volunteer to write a review, probably by tomorrow my time.

> draft-ietf-dmarc-eaiauth-02 will soon start IETF LC. I would like a quick sanity check that it doesn't say anything wrong from I18N point of view. (A reviewer familiar with EAI, SMTP, DKIM/SPF/DMAR…

I'm in no way as familiar with SMTP,... as some others on the list 
(which sets the bar extremely high), but I'll try my best.

Regards,   Martin.