Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #39 - remove p=quarantine

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 02 December 2020 04:15 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1A83A0FDA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:15:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=D7Gn+ELX; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=l8RMMPVe
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCv9nnlWY51C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:15:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAEBF3A0FDE for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:15:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 65201 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2020 04:15:25 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=feae.5fc714dd.k2012; bh=xIbyhN+WnQR+yB9vno4mqAxzem9q+fDbeG1vewEC9dk=; b=D7Gn+ELXe/LS8a8Jd2Bpkg2cIrixMIiFTopMhHglJwr9XPRMji4BEyP8vE7zBvbZk/hZ0fXOeDXz8vnw2c8+XohjJSojBMWTqxRGpc6/rJBfMEvRdjzRM8XFVqho+damdiuAfjg3bOIHrvsHpJThzan+BraPkEmI9x4BwsYlilSRPMg+IP3YV0hyj7f35Ft864qkYx8ktxSTRqn2agFpmGzaylawPVucEqN51uaZHGJKES8qg5UIFgGOW7maUO85T9if1cOh3tRvX4rsX4Wi9hLBNvlGylUEDZmMQ0V67Zhzl2lHZpsZzeZuN5IPNw8k00bpXyl7ZGhuHxdiO3CpAg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=feae.5fc714dd.k2012; bh=xIbyhN+WnQR+yB9vno4mqAxzem9q+fDbeG1vewEC9dk=; b=l8RMMPVeDga5ff/wT2Krc/fnjt8fq91ff27PVA+p0sdxfpQCX+fhExGdUQ1nmhyosODylaSqc+MsZcK/rFS3ZeroCDP8pKmt4SvAgHT/aixIo1jAgycdtHMbtaWbdYJNGskwOlbHmCjBYgsidqvpN0s2dUlsz8h0L1MbhC0UoDss8SeHcoQAZMiK7uFIdqLrPRJwLbp6+DONbff5zKlVF/ucB/JG6gE1csNDwqc73Tj8SmUWUQsgkFwcsz6mVgkYvYhOpKha8wbHFRocE2vQ3XBARFBnkxFJwKnUqMySRGACVKy+lbu7FcNYHBZvOqyIaWeXaJbVE8tG1Fw0GkzPSw==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 02 Dec 2020 04:15:24 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3A67228C81C9; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 23:15:23 -0500 (EST)
Date: 1 Dec 2020 23:15:23 -0500
Message-Id: <20201202041524.3A67228C81C9@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: smj@crash.com
In-Reply-To: <327860af-2fa7-63ee-4b89-6e7e383f3d53@crash.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/-ShodZQmp5NNamJLIJsIl3vb55o>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #39 - remove p=quarantine
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2020 04:15:28 -0000

In article <327860af-2fa7-63ee-4b89-6e7e383f3d53@crash.com> you write:
>> Do you think there was a shared understanding of how p=quarantine
>> would be implemented? ...

>quarantine." Rather that the Domain Owner is requesting whatever the 
>Receiver implements between rejecting the message and putting it in the 
>inbox, and is willing to apply.

I get that but I'm wondering if there is any consistency in what that turns out to be.

It is easy to explain what rejecting a message means, and pretty easy
to explain do what you would have done if DMARC didn't exist, but that
middle region is murky.

R's,
John