Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 17 July 2019 21:40 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 A41F312011A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.751
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=GedhSktf; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=IAmoKNMz
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 pScUZ4gkgy1D for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
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 46986120116 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 91759 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2019 21:40:22 -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; s=1666b.5d2f95c6.k1907; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=LPMTYVsVhZ1nhvT/2bJ2VLm4tTl0fV2P/j/8kRBEi6k=; b=GedhSktfV+EVktkwFqufVmKARcpQQTCiqnFdXlPb6cicW0CwmodcGNSUUnsLFwM+IeGApzQcPssxgsFmCbv12UmdTzASuBOL53myjXhLcFvF9Evd2+wdyfLQ5lT4ykfXLwge4l4Gg/KKenXDNlhS36cyDnIlNtIquGIhmR8dV8wHpz7KwXWmf0rHIOP7toQOyN6lEqyz+32figCTD/dUwkeqkMYiasaPqK1rPhFZTCQbiy6aWlEWQ0vKH3HwijZi
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; s=1666b.5d2f95c6.k1907; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=LPMTYVsVhZ1nhvT/2bJ2VLm4tTl0fV2P/j/8kRBEi6k=; b=IAmoKNMzbiRpnCIThy6yInJDrQwU8G9V0YD30ekha0kNR2KhcxK4Cqw/+fnYmNfb1I2wMDzcTLsVWZQc9bHhrQPoq7HantMcU8XX4zG/0tvPJmiuchpXeOTtMoxzVqWnpADRjSkgf+ZtnT8xKgJ/350vjNX38+RzBfX1aETCIJJPESSRwZQ2N/2UeNRgbi3FXHUaQAXRZv9tT8IsgeIWFq54lWc/c+h4YUYzs3lgRKygXjqvcQxRuwsQwfoliwFZ
Received: from ary.qy ([64.246.232.221]) by imap.iecc.com ([64.57.183.75]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP; 17 Jul 2019 21:40:21 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id A4DEE50EC1E; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 17:40:20 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 17 Jul 2019 17:40:20 -0400
Message-Id: <20190717214021.A4DEE50EC1E@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: kboth@drkurt.com
In-Reply-To: <CABuGu1rSyifv0B9RtD3_R2ex-sh+nVrh4Q3H=kU=ZsDWzVRAgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/2Ck6HulCS5dHMPMIrm4i0reX5-E>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Nonexistent Domain Policy was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
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, 17 Jul 2019 21:40:27 -0000

In article <CABuGu1rSyifv0B9RtD3_R2ex-sh+nVrh4Q3H=kU=ZsDWzVRAgQ@mail.gmail.com>; you write:
>Firstly, I'm a little concerned with the sentence which says 'Note that
>"np" will be ignored for DMARC records published on subdomains of
>Organizational Domains and PSDs due to the effect of the DMARC policy
>discovery mechanism described in DMARC [RFC7489] Section 6.6.3.' I don't
>think that is an accurate portrayal. ...

I think what it means is that if there's a DMARC record on a
subdomain, it won't see any np= in the org domain or the PSD.  I agree
the wording could be better.  I also don't understand what possible
meaning an np= on a subdomain record would have.

R's,
John