idnits 2.17.1 draft-moonesamy-senderid-spf-historic-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The draft header indicates that this document obsoletes RFC4408, but the abstract doesn't seem to directly say this. It does mention RFC4408 though, so this could be OK. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 20, 2009) is 5545 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4408 (Obsoleted by RFC 7208) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group S. Moonesamy 3 Internet Draft February 20, 2009 4 Intended status: Informational 5 Obsoletes: 4405, 4406, 4407, 4408 (if approved) 6 Expires: August 19, 2009 8 Reclassification of Sender ID and SPF to Historic Status 9 draft-moonesamy-senderid-spf-historic-00.txt 11 Status of this Memo 13 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 14 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 16 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 17 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 18 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 19 Drafts. 21 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 22 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 23 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 24 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 26 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 29 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 30 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 19, 2009. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with 44 respect to this document. 46 Abstract 48 This memo reclassifies RFC 4405, SMTP Service Extension for 49 Indicating the Responsible Submitter of an E-Mail Message, 50 RFC 4406, Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail, RFC 4407, 51 Purported Responsible Address in E-Mail Messages and RFC 4408, 52 Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in 53 E-Mail, Version 1 to Historic status. This memo also obsoletes 54 RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407, and RFC 4408. 56 1. Introduction 58 In April 2006, RFC 4405, SMTP Service Extension for Indicating the 59 Responsible Submitter of an E-Mail Message, RFC 4406, Sender ID: 60 Authenticating E-Mail, RFC 4407, Purported Responsible Address in 61 E-Mail Messages and RFC 4408, Sender Policy Framework (SPF) were 62 published simultaneously as Experimental RFCs. There was no general 63 technical consensus about how to reconcile the two approaches known 64 as Sender ID [RFC4406] and SPF [RFC4408]. 66 This memo recommends that the RFCs specifying the Sender ID and SPF 67 experiments, the SMTP Service Extension for Indicating the 68 Responsible Submitter of an E-Mail Message [RFC4405] and the 69 Purported Responsible Address in E-Mail Messages [RFC4407] be moved 70 to Historic. It also proposes obsoleting the "Received-SPF:" header 71 field defined in RFC 4408 [RFC4408]. 73 2. Reclassification to Historic Status 75 The Sender ID experiment reuses DNS records that may have been 76 created for SPF. Depending on the content of the record, this may 77 mean that Sender ID heuristics can be applied incorrectly to a 78 message. Participants publishing SPF experiment DNS records may 79 also be affected if they do not publish Sender ID DNS records. These 80 two conflicting experiments can lead to delivery failures or loss of 81 mail. 83 The community was invited to observe the success or failure of the 84 two approaches during the two years following publication of the 85 Experimental RFCs. Since it is over two years and as there is an 86 interoperability problem, it is recommended that the Sender ID and 87 SPF experiments be concluded. Therefore, RFC 4405, RFC 4406, 88 RFC 4407, and RFC 4408 are reclassified to Historic status. 89 RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407, and RFC 4408 can also be considered as 90 obsolete. 92 3. Security Considerations 94 Reclassification of RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407, and RFC 4408 to 95 Historic will not have any negative effect on the security of the 96 Internet. 98 4. IANA Considerations 100 It is requested that IANA update the "Received-SPF:" header field 101 registration [RFC4408] in the IANA Permanent Message Header Field 102 Registry [RFC3864]. 104 Header field name: Received-SPF 105 Applicable protocol: Mail 106 Status: obsoleted 107 Author/Change controller: IETF 108 Specification document(s): RFC 4408, RFC XXXX 110 5. References 112 5.1. Normative References 114 [RFC3864] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, Registration 115 Procedures for Message Header Fields, BCP 90, RFC 3864, 116 September 2004. 118 5.2. Informative References 120 [RFC4405] Allman E. and H. Katz, "SMTP Service Extension for 121 Indicating the Responsible Submitter of an E-Mail 122 Message", RFC 4405, April 2006. 124 [RFC4406] Lyon, J. and M. Wong, "Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail", 125 RFC 4406, April 2006. 127 [RFC4407] Lyon, J., "Purported Responsible Address in E-Mail 128 Messages", RFC 4407, April 2006. 130 [RFC4408] Wong, M. and W. Schlitt, "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) 131 for Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1", 132 RFC 4408, April 2006. 134 Author's Address 136 S. Moonesamy 137 76, Ylang Ylang Avenue 138 Quatre Bornes 139 Mauritius 141 Email: sm+ietf@elandsys.com