IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nitpicky questions about DMARC record syntax

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 16 January 2019 15:30 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 8F8231294FA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 07:30:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=tKqUvUx+; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=hLddLHhO
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 Dbi5c6yCNg3b for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 07:30:20 -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 0A7F71200D7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 07:30:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 40954 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2019 15:30:18 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=9ff7.5c3f4e0a.k1901; bh=BXsx+/s67QnfMwrBnUY6qE2AQNJbhQ0ARtepJFHDYkA=; b=tKqUvUx+UMZZUqkv9il7jD/0WgCGE+/ojxkPnLA/dON0F+yCZ223hdtwfCAofyS46NC+tUL3kvTXAo66r8ksdJTSF2Gk8lAKAQ3LSbpZOJCVnOf2ymsQaLiMziyjD+8hmPdhlyMh1L+AP1rTlAlhzSRkAAJG68v0o7OTeQ46R+67i3slNPCnYyraZBz+HyxNXR/ReVT7CrVPjna6XBPl4NyY7XNfvgwJoQCL9Y50fndHs3Zx6PhuXq5nvPIvraVG
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=9ff7.5c3f4e0a.k1901; bh=BXsx+/s67QnfMwrBnUY6qE2AQNJbhQ0ARtepJFHDYkA=; b=hLddLHhOJJCgZ8bPQNCUqf39AQekWfzMRV8RlEcOs1qhwyITYVEd8T2sHZmLcaiMYovcnC4HvNWXzaxu9QCgF3EK0MMz/FTGaH9LEN61h/lssh129LlR0EgyR/fav8UFGm3pfCa914oIUcgwndh5Qd6nF/MV9BS/lfeiMFH5nz+wKOCjzxgoq4i6igpd2zesz8lUMGdCsvuE92Z8cGRdf8CVFgKbF9tAPhmtlJ51HqA5WCXN1NGL10VcYWQRcRzT
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 16 Jan 2019 15:30:17 -0000
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 10:30:17 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901161029520.36401@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <b6d9024b-8a88-66fb-cfe7-800ee463c01c@gmail.com>
References: <20190116005804.A0A80200CACDA9@ary.qy> <b6d9024b-8a88-66fb-cfe7-800ee463c01c@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/-cp1eEq9ZRadIuYqcSYIpFclsbU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nitpicky questions about DMARC record syntax
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, 16 Jan 2019 15:30:22 -0000

> The formal specification is quite clear on both of your questions:
>
>   Section 6.4:
>
>   dmarc-version   = "v" *WSP "=" *WSP %x44 %x4d %x41 %x52 %x43 %x31
>
>
> which means that the white space is required to be allowed and the value in 
> this tag-value is case sensitive.

Thanks, but the white space in question is before the "v".

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email