[14:57:42] msk joins the room
[15:42:43] msk leaves the room
[15:42:52] msk joins the room
[15:51:04] <ScottK> Are we starting in 10 minutes or did I do the time zone math wrong?
[15:51:55] Kurt joins the room
[15:52:05] <Kurt> Yes, in 8 min now
[15:52:27] <Kurt> Looks like webex won't let people join until T-5m
[15:53:11] <ScottK> Thanks.
[15:53:51] <Kurt> I'm happy that I seem to have found a jabber client that works on Mac again (trying Swift this time 'round)
[15:56:22] <Kurt> Good luck on keeping the bluesheet up to date with this list :-)
[15:59:48] <msk> lulz @ "IESG Overlord"
[16:01:39] <Kurt> I'd like to find out what might be on tap for the July IETF (pay to play) session...
[16:02:51] Barry Leiba joins the room
[16:06:48] Seth Blank joins the room
[16:07:38] cabo joins the room
[16:11:32] Jim Fenton joins the room
[16:12:14] Jim Fenton has set the subject to: DMARC Interim 11 June 2020
[16:27:55] <Kurt> The header munging is not always policy/domain-sensitive
[16:28:39] <Jim Fenton> What's to prevent mailing list owner from just saying, "no, change your DMARC policy if you want to use my list"?
[16:28:40] <ScottK> It's also totally not standardized, so it seems odd to me to come to a standards organization to address it.
[16:28:46] <Kurt> @seth, @msk - would like to be sure we have a bit of time at the end of the session to talk about the agenda for the discussion scheduled for 108...
[16:28:52] <ScottK> There are plenty that do that.
[16:29:24] <msk> @kurt: That's for the chairs. :)
[16:29:50] <ScottK> I seriously doubt that from munging could get standardized.
[16:29:59] <Kurt> @jim - you're right, but domain owners won't. It ends up being a burden on the ML participant to find a source that they can send through - it becomes a bigger problem if the list gates membership based on domain as a proxy for "who you work for"
[16:30:34] <ScottK> DMARC wasn't designed for domains that have actual people.
[16:30:52] <Kurt> bugs in implementation of pct seem like it is separate from the spec per se
[16:31:03] <Jim Fenton> @Kurt - Yes, I guess that will cause a lot of people to move their mailing list participation to domains that don't have restrictive DMARC policies.
[16:31:13] <msk> We tried a bunch of header munging annotation ideas a while ago.  Nothing really caught on, sadly.
[16:31:14] <Kurt> exactly
[16:32:06] <Kurt> Per Jesse's comment, there is no way that we can "force" MLs to munge headers - that started a huge war
[16:33:47] <Kurt> @ScottK - too bad your phrase of "gross hack" didn't make it into the scribe's notes :-)
[16:34:23] <Jim Fenton> The other problem with standardized header munging is: if you use that to reconstruct the original from address, can you trust the munging that was performed?
[16:34:32] <Kurt> I'm surprised that Alexey isn't in this chat
[16:34:56] <Barry Leiba> Alexey rarely uses jabber.
[16:38:52] ScottK almost never uses it.
[16:39:17] <Jim Fenton> Was a meeting agenda posted?
[16:39:27] <ScottK> Imagine what I would have said if I wasn't being polite an restrained.
[16:40:07] <Kurt> :-)
[16:40:08] <Jim Fenton> restraint is a virtue.
[16:40:27] <ScottK> There's an agenda in the etherpad, but it mostly says 'talk about stuff'.
[16:40:29] <Kurt> @Jim - yes - it's at the top of the etherpad notes, but it was pretty loose
[16:42:09] <Jim Fenton> I would like to raise the question about whether users see or act on From domain name (can we get WG consensus on that), but not sure when to jump in queue -- seems OT for current discussion.
[16:42:29] <msk> @jim: Referring to the recent thread on the list?
[16:43:06] <Jim Fenton> yes
[16:47:10] <msk> up to the chairs
[16:47:23] <msk> (I love being able to say that)
[16:47:58] <ScottK> Did he just describe ARC?
[16:48:10] <Jim Fenton> No he described the l= parameter in DKIM.
[16:48:29] <ScottK> Oh.  Thanks.
[16:50:20] <ScottK> There are millions of ways to write records to be equivalent to +all that don't look like it.
[16:50:41] <ScottK> It's pointless to special case some types of records.
[16:50:48] <Kurt> agreed
[16:51:00] <Jim Fenton> Yeah, if DMARC is there to protect a domain's reputation they should allow the domain to make any policy they want
[16:53:27] <ScottK> Back in 2005 or so a lot of the discussion about use of Sender and in the end, because Outlook Express didn't display Sender the focus was on From.
[16:54:10] <msk> That's interesting, given PRA and all that.
[16:54:23] <ScottK> If we were in the alternate universe where Outlook Express displayed Sender in 2005 we'd be in a different place now.
[16:54:38] <ScottK> PRA was a joke.
[16:54:42] <Kurt> @jim - it's not reallly the l= parameter as much as he was suggesting only signing the headers (effectively l=0); that's why ARC is build entirely on and around headers only
[16:54:59] <Kurt> a bad joke (PRA)
[16:55:03] <msk> I just mean that Outlook Express didn't pay attention to Sender when the same protagonist pushed PRA.
[16:55:13] <ScottK> The only reason it even got into the discussion is that MS was a 5,000 pound gorilla.
[16:55:15] <Kurt> but it's not far from the "Author" discussion that is floating around
[16:55:23] <ScottK> Ah.  Yes.
[16:55:35] <ScottK> Kurt Yes.
[16:56:07] <Kurt> @jim - see the thread on the list about Author and whether or not DMARC is for the receiver filter or human...
[16:56:22] <ScottK> If sender had been used properly then, we'd have 'author' now.
[16:56:25] <msk> I think that's the thread he wanted to bring up.
[16:57:02] <Barry Leiba> Hey!  It's only $230!
[16:57:15] <Barry Leiba> (If you pay by 26 June...)
[16:57:46] <Jim Fenton> @Kurt Yes, perhaps subtle difference from l=, but his suggestion was to sign as little as possible. Note that l= was widely disliked because of the abuse that might be enabled by it.
[16:58:08] ScottK thinks another interim is way better than at IETF 108.
[16:58:24] <msk> What's the difference?
[16:58:25] <Kurt> @barry - I know, and if they schedule meetings properly (for me :-) ) then I could just pay for a 1 day price
[16:59:01] <Kurt> @msk - difference between interim vs. 108? $$$ and timing conflicts
[17:00:01] <Kurt> With virtual events, I really don't see the value in agglomerating them all into a non-stop marathon
[17:00:31] msk leaves the room
[17:00:35] Seth Blank leaves the room
[17:00:40] Jim Fenton leaves the room
[17:01:13] cabo leaves the room
[17:01:27] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[17:01:29] ScottK leaves the room
[17:01:43] Kurt leaves the room
[17:03:23] cabo joins the room
[17:16:13] cabo leaves the room
[18:28:26] cabo joins the room
[18:41:45] cabo leaves the room
[19:23:21] cabo joins the room
[19:35:47] cabo leaves the room
[20:17:16] cabo joins the room
[20:29:46] cabo leaves the room
[22:00:37] cabo joins the room