IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Kurt Andersen <kurta@drkurt.com> Wed, 16 January 2019 17:16 UTC

Return-Path: <kurta@drkurt.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 9DF5E124BAA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=drkurt.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 GnMbn1LiBOX7 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd44.google.com (mail-io1-xd44.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d44]) (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 EB850124B0C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd44.google.com with SMTP id x6so5470128ioa.9 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Aa8ma3+VyNmDdF9OUQOevIi33JCAZBHhUBw+bqh3gYQ=; b=Z40IDJvPZ6zVBzUUbQNTfaQr9cciv/CeWwD/i4+9QhWP6LKP1ErrIl+tU9pIx5JjA6 qBeIDdIQVs4CILEV9mKCMdtCVHA/vgo2XVUEXNy31Hqh4+YSxCebyaJJhG0KC5s+9Gr6 uSLtoO3s8gF7Pj8ONpjZmm2UuY8WWXC92iIFE=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Aa8ma3+VyNmDdF9OUQOevIi33JCAZBHhUBw+bqh3gYQ=; b=nfMQkdmE8mMAXdwXjPCgtUMeN2btdDlYSj5oqwG9ktbran06IBEAxh75lWH/zozfkZ zfNEEYzuYshjhF8HptCuuvotFX0bVl8gpS84GTBEHv2f7qLCmf/jGsghdHwto1Q1HqaZ wDug9HEzmLEyy1XZTumHPc++6zf42N/c+R8dYm386F1qP90TFj6RPm84ALEz2amhfjgU tH3wOfpNB1Kg1eFwzsN9zj9JqIP+BYWo+oAqbGi6ZC/3nnHdT2z57OVj22Gvw4XgI5Pj 0uvhSVts2TfwitFHmM8bj5CkzbeJEoQR/NX3hWs9tYHCnJ4XMm/IKu1uPi/21u62u5Km YaNQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukebOM3aWMcVPFIVafHOMUFzvfbayk1qI5p83HBLhFm/NsR6J+Nd d7Lm3DmmW8EmaCxszswVagab0JSQ5MqR7WukUV3BZQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN6vYx+EnlKzRaxsSFCrM9gDaRcn1opS+Wvqldvlrd5X+ory1vGWRmYJhESLztAVIMTkLRgXbAX15eG+m3Ul2hs=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8597:: with SMTP id f23mr5765410ioj.238.1547658974933; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190116005804.A0A80200CACDA9@ary.qy> <b6d9024b-8a88-66fb-cfe7-800ee463c01c@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901161029520.36401@ary.qy> <babe5ec6-9ceb-c7e1-1758-8dc20d116b55@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901161050550.36401@ary.qy>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901161050550.36401@ary.qy>
From: Kurt Andersen <kurta@drkurt.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:16:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CABuGu1oqy8NxfpCZOu0v-z2D2MmZUfD43B3diGZ0xQtNwPD8EQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006f5676057f966f67"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/2EKzBxvOMUtUR_tQpRnLlGwDlHk>
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 17:16:19 -0000

Is there really a benefit in filtering out people/organizations that are
not fastidious in the use of whitespace and character case?

Seems overly nitpicky and something to reconsider as we look forward
forward a standards track for DMARC.

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 07:52 John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com wrote:

> > The ABNF rule I included, and the one that cites it (dmarc-record) do
> not
> > show any white space permitted before the 'v', so no it's not legal.
>
> Ah, now that I look at it again, I see that the dmarc-record rule is the
> one that matters here, since it allows WSP after the version but not
> before.
>
> OK, they're all broken.  That's what I'd sort of hoped.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email