Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #1 - SPF alignment

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Thu, 31 December 2020 14:46 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 00C833A0CCC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:46:51 -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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
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 jz_eedn5GlyV for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:46:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (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 88D1C3A0CC7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:46:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1609426007; bh=cTNqwZat5ZBNBjxJA6duv4LBnRdW+cI0ba98+51OiPU=; l=1033; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=C+e654sjx6ZpWFdn1mb/Cxcbw3+GJkxJfpqUjuhi7q3whtaUsUsNtnE/ctzhb9Dkk tO832uGhWO7SbTtZfjRRcptI3hWXNVoUU4S8dtAcFpzFnOKvfz4kURD1oxlyqHoJa/ hXIub3zZxAXxYMOkZdGpYHUkI2g10j5k3e1Bfy0aMLO/ZFqgV10/Hx4gliME7
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Original-From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC0CF.000000005FEDE456.00001290; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 15:46:46 +0100
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <bef64e7a-571b-a73f-dc91-aa402ca320c8@taugh.com> <45b3df7-5c6-9744-2ca8-1542e1b33e7b@taugh.com>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <478c7b56-f2b4-c7c1-7722-27fdce4bb8e9@tana.it>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 15:46:45 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <45b3df7-5c6-9744-2ca8-1542e1b33e7b@taugh.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/26zTBID1iTHaXtph2OWpibQrDH4>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #1 - SPF alignment
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: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:46:51 -0000

On Wed 30/Dec/2020 22:06:01 +0100 John R Levine wrote:
>> We would like to close this ticket by Dec 15, two weeks from now, so short 
>> trenchant comments are welcome.
>>
>> Ticket #1 is about SPF alignment.  We need to replace references to 4408 with 
>> 7408, ando clarify what if anything we do with SPF HELO checks if
>> the MAIL FROM is null.  One possibility is to say only MAIL FROM SPF counts, 
>> if you want to align your bounces, sign them.  The other is to explicitly say 
>> that HELO alignment is OK on bounces.
> 
> I didn't hear a lot of strong opinions, but I think they leaned in the 
> direction of only checking the MAIL FROM, since the name of the MTA often is 
> unrelated to the From: domain.
> 
> This means that if you want your bounces to be DMARC aligned, they'd need DKIM 
> signatures.


Bounces with HELO mta.example.com should have From: postmaster@mta.example.com, 
where example.com may be a virtual domain or the "real" domain name, depending 
on the configuration.


Best
Ale
--