Subject: [Dcrup] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-usage-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 22:40:52 -0700

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-usage-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-usage/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would have expected section 4 to be explicit in the interaction between the
requirement that "rsa-sha1 MUST NOT be used for signing or verifying" and the
Authentication-Results header defined in RFC 7001. In particular, I would have
expected to see guidance here whether receipt of a message using sha1 should be
coded as "neutral" or "policy": as an implementor, I would be unsure which one
to use.