Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> Fri, 04 December 2020 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@gmail.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 9DD453A1037 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:25:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 GY4F2Nus469M for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:25:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FEA23A1034 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:25:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id t7so4821287pfh.7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:25:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=kncGKU131C/tZrlKpYOhlVkAHVVFO/nGguNLLfe4h1s=; b=X7k0UZHfIXVjxvZHc8gagZ2IifxPyh7a1dLjq+VXTREcTjmZ4ee7wsxBA/jtyArQo+ EilXEJo0bxZ0tGW7YT3hpzrUaQDwKZac4Opi4tY87DI1+9HHsdt6zDV1J+3FjujDONH+ m87zr2y13kfTuzXllIebqY0SNxZwO2oTuzCYPFzWvtK4RwoWB79Sq6gSqNciC+RzN/kG x9GJ32rTbiCdrWUr7WplqxJdD0Xr7xMioX0YayaV8Fgly58i86sgRO6kVdNtl3CFXMdM j+ggwucp6ZZrQBRuLyplB1FLoFr9QnSAN2B/aGQmj4j55Abf4uMGu0+U0O9nWy1ZInWP wTbQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=kncGKU131C/tZrlKpYOhlVkAHVVFO/nGguNLLfe4h1s=; b=YB/0/3ojheFjPimrSzIUF20vjM0+VeTUgBkde+dTLHwMygL/c52EDJsbsz+OBF8NxP stWRVgwBaY5nFpbX9GTM1lvzdOX7ZEqiBLp87aeDSwfS5ivzRbKVRdmyfEFAzV9TQ0QK HvE8OtXnhvIRtOXT2x1P/VIxN1DsSOMiCoG9ujs2J3R+XpuGe2S3AQMlFZiVYuQ5zZGx 0ueqQE4I7Lx5he/9okzFqwScnAFI6p+a2q+UBLPtoTJZG3AlvUpQlkRJCtMnHKtlt0Ze bfgCEzHcpu9TSld8k7B0Gvk3BkP7iAJfKDuuLInjOzhtJm5FL4GTL2IwsBgc5trtoAUN rpEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532SgXlgsE69E96Lx2+T0/+Ij0LumTMHpqhfknjtGbo3xmk2k2J6 FTVfQ3XmglGksTZGBZmgfTRP2qh78R8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJycjIpSwUoUxjgtWfdQC3sClRXGAKxhP3wBR9nQc491zU5TSFZA1XLBKH4iONjjIGYNdZ43Ag==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:4c41:: with SMTP id m1mr9462007pgl.427.1607124319620; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:25:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.62.181]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v186sm5777885pfb.152.2020.12.04.15.25.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:25:19 -0800 (PST)
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
References: <134860ee-5fbf-2fb3-a5b3-4be68806ab22@mtcc.com> <CABa8R6veBqY1fUuoy3Qm=vfrV51_5YyoS0P4SLSbKJP_Qrcn-A@mail.gmail.com> <7224575d-685f-5020-073e-c1880acecc88@mtcc.com> <7e459496-61f8-ddcd-713c-3b6be448090c@gmail.com> <2cecceac-1add-44ec-6e16-e157fee293fe@mtcc.com> <5a577765-4a0d-e1bf-5321-dfeff19d107e@gmail.com> <40d7e78e-7026-c65c-383c-df4e3c537de3@mtcc.com> <6fae9ca6-d8ea-1d62-4156-249191029cc3@gmail.com> <80f9963e-20bf-cdfe-cf3b-cda7b2ed08ab@mtcc.com> <CAOZAAfPbKv-9w9aZhyYUsKkEtR2W90O3JuCfB3pe60qOWtT_zg@mail.gmail.com> <c0ee5678-822c-40b3-9072-e6a4c350f34e@mtcc.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6dea9912-83fd-b981-adca-4e6c81047b92@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:25:16 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c0ee5678-822c-40b3-9072-e6a4c350f34e@mtcc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/0gxVofp1vQPaCLCFJnMNXrh-oK8>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?
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: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 23:25:22 -0000

On 12/4/2020 3:11 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Is it really that hard to summarize why the decision was made and what 
> changed in the bis version? I really don't understand this snipe hunt.


You ask a series of basic question and get a string of responses, which 
point you to easily-found answers, and you call this a practical joke.  
   On the offchance you don't mean one that you've instigated, please 
explain.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
dcrocker@gmail.com
408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2@redcross.org