Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #47 (Removal of "pct" tag) - With Interim Notes

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 04 June 2021 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@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 0034F3A1EF2 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 12:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=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 dZMRjsYawrnn for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 12:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (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 627A43A1EF5 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 12:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id d2so8890492ljj.11 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 12:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=m4V+AAJ2a36H5estDQTmzl4e8yvYqpf7+YOL/ICYi88=; b=rGIoIRc5AZTkyibYiMcem5BZOIfqmaev+4yL+p/UfgIXEjTvVoQwNFbJEx5btDCy4d rNQ+rI4fElGC2/H6wA9+2hpxvnDhaK7D1OTvJRjLGIDYW8KTPwXpsxtpPptgXux4dYYd 1wCdiAooOakaQoOwfckq995ioc9eG+VdmEqeHSL1d0zNsEpviMyBTS84QMfffHyriNOM o9fHqeMYnFjdR1pGjkJHQT4PSdhM3W8Cidd7qFZfmHNAHKcBrSyLfFJbvVR+nx6rgS5U UBrIT0aDkQ5BnQlaBPP3O7jgePUJqeQqcq+USJJ+89zU+ALzl3/A4LU20uy7UXDGyGrX wqwg==
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=m4V+AAJ2a36H5estDQTmzl4e8yvYqpf7+YOL/ICYi88=; b=je8Hjp/8Uw3m3IYyz2mXLy961d33KXMhuv95LzKhLZ9WIvnD22T3IejlRyoQxCRGJ4 YmyzPDSWMQEaC+7dxExD5nu/2H5zkxk0WZFVjYKG16e82s7g/VClPtIM0xf/gYKeqhRu ILxUBzYeSn9NV7aC35hSyTRpYljnYs9E7VrzkZLbJErLCZbBmm0/SM4wIK5M0/I9r+wJ R00MA2UlRPEAcBwIbGrV64NMOMJr2o58Z/tfcKXesta4RRXcI8jgoWtt8tjoj7q0iNpS ud4NRDwYXFOXYsB9+OQhRs/IcqbkPY1ibt+pG/kTH840TKx3+ZC0xPcgjWprdgVVAqCy 5v9A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531wtxXy8JMmfjStndcF1LP8oPKdMqF3zmweG89U0efiuZ4V16T0 UyDY9vb7jKHjHcCzIvNqwktYchn42vrbci2tb44=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQxxTNID7fD4bX3f1Sjpyej9tLo6epwXfllBFHJtZmGjd0zZ6A3bFKs3Kc0wx8wD5bsPqAjw8irYrus6onjLQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1105:: with SMTP id d5mr4549931ljo.431.1622836784195; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 12:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <e6403b99-dcc2-1507-4187-a7586c9f5eea@tana.it> <20210603221737.C8146B6B7BB@ary.qy> <CAJ4XoYcek=dW6Q75CTzQzB+9szUWreC8D8_he0SiLw-7m_25UQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XoYcek=dW6Q75CTzQzB+9szUWreC8D8_he0SiLw-7m_25UQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 15:59:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+HDHatO8XTzpPZXWL0+BzgJ5=JjAQDoWPi=rFLTO2V=cw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000cea0c05c3f62247"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/4j_BQLXEbXq8lR-_qiF4BYUYeaA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #47 (Removal of "pct" tag) - With Interim Notes
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 Jun 2021 19:59:51 -0000

+1 With Mr Levine's line of thinking.

I also agree with keeping pct= tag.

tim


On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 7:16 PM Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 6:17 PM John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> It appears that Alessandro Vesely  <vesely@tana.it> said:
>> >On Thu 03/Jun/2021 05:45:33 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> >> I don't understand what "demeaning a domain's policy" means.
>> >
>> >I meant to say that p=quarantine; pct=0 is to be considered a strict
>> policy to
>> >all effects.  Saying so should prevent reasoning something like "Oh,
>> they said
>> >quarantine, but since pct=0 it is somewhat faked, so I'll skip X", where
>> X
>> >could be rewriting From:, displaying a BIMI image, record aggregate
>> data, or
>> >any other action that might depend on the policy.  That is to say pct=0
>> does
>> >not alter the value of p=, otherwise testing becomes a nightmare.
>>
>> If we agree that's what we mean, that's what we should say, e.g., add
>> something
>> like this:
>>
>>  Senders may use pct=0 to signal an intention to apply a stricter
>>  DMARC policy in the future, and to request receivers that do special
>>  processing based on DMARC policy to do that processing. Examples of
>>  special processing might include mailing list software rewriting
>>  addresses in From headers.
>>
>
> As long as we get the wording right, I agree with your line of thinking
> John. Again, we don't have insight as to the extent that receivers will
> honor the request.
>
> Michael Hammer
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>