Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #55, closing

Alessandro Vesely <> Mon, 25 January 2021 19:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF083A1757 for <>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:04:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.221
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IeC_DjkNd7gT for <>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:04:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C81BB3A1754 for <>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:04:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=delta; t=1611601467; bh=d1CN0igSYLJbz2qdkTeaqQ5bsCiP57/OtDxlFjU17wo=; l=1097; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=B6ZRkwtHa1FPXHwxAaTwHDEvlva2J7eATMpIeMQT3iOG+WUL6pkAqs8nUXKfw53zz aluFrDt2mINt0/OGZi3ChESTpFMCGpC2e1NxIgOpsTV0oh2Uu5GQbHNuC3RAcFf0jL EFSeFRQ6XPYwwG9urHeWmbX/PsnqXDNvc12+hom0qk4o3t4xDtdVgJc/PY3wO
Authentication-Results:; auth=pass (details omitted)
Original-From: Alessandro Vesely <>
Received: from [] (pcale.tana []) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC053.00000000600F163B.000007A0; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 20:04:27 +0100
To: John Levine <>,, "Kurt Andersen (b)" <>
References: <20210125180128.D48E86C13032@ary.qy>
From: Alessandro Vesely <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 20:04:27 +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: <20210125180128.D48E86C13032@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #55, closing
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 19:04:31 -0000

On Mon 25/Jan/2021 19:01:28 +0100 John Levine wrote:
> In article <> you write:
>>    These reports SHOULD include the "call-to-action" URI(s) from inside
>>    messages that failed to authenticate.
> Well, you can guess where that came from.

Should we mention fraudster takedowns among the purpose of failure reports?

>>    These reports SHOULD include as much of the message and message header
>>    as is reasonable to support the Domain Owner's investigation into what
>>    caused the message to fail authentication and track down the sender,
>>    unless privacy reasons suggest otherwise.
> I'd strip it down more.
>   These reports should include as much of the message header and body as
>   possible, consistent with the reporting party's privacy policies, to
>   enable the Domain Owner to diagnose the authentication failure.


> The "should" is deliberately lower case since it's not something you can
> describe mechanically.

Someone will question it anyway, I'd guess.