Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #53 (Remove reporting message size chunking) - With Interim Notes

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Mon, 31 May 2021 08:58 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 C50CF3A0538 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 01:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
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 Eh3u1qXShmPY for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 01:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
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 876033A0529 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 May 2021 01:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1622451483; bh=jVxhLpklpm66bjLkeW3qiaIvXNzvdi79/s/geYzYsow=; l=930; h=To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=De5iSDbqH5QJPZcDUx5ad+LCT1IASkgSzardrvAQ4z1WvQixjmwzT/6OLNrd/jgth 490ZUjzXO068LklHkFSZ3JAjytS4IiEV1K4TkNSLqPa7EWDovwxeli3tU6+gQhvcqw Q8/DdzyHigSWu5hOI2XJJOaGRtaf0c4lQrEfMjSUNjI09DdY5fhCQaiI7qfUG
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Original-From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Original-Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
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 00000000005DC053.0000000060B4A51B.00006393; Mon, 31 May 2021 10:58:03 +0200
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CAHej_8npHwekgJDLOV=hVPdd0OFoMumJCKL5Yitz5oWrhkQdNg@mail.gmail.com> <a8ef636c-815a-6b40-a955-b7049afba82f@crash.com> <a7fc5ba7-e17b-72b5-e81a-1dd0ac6cb418@tana.it> <CALaySJ+FGMBA2AuNzwUOyA5eccUkQ399Kc3c-oj99oZRov8oPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <88957ada-7514-f664-6269-88503c1a81fd@tana.it>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 10:58:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+FGMBA2AuNzwUOyA5eccUkQ399Kc3c-oj99oZRov8oPQ@mail.gmail.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/4xiCV2Ul-lHZq6g70BNCAi2cZxA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Consensus Sought - Ticket #53 (Remove reporting message size chunking) - 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: Mon, 31 May 2021 08:58:15 -0000

On Mon 31/May/2021 01:41:08 +0200 Barry Leiba wrote:
> Yes,  but you’re speaking as a report CONSUMER.  Steve said “report 
> generator”, and the point is that there is no evidence that anyone generates
> this.  Yes?


No, I meant recognizing the suffix and aborting as producer actions.  That is 
roughly documented by saying: "If the size limit is exceeded, the child is 
killed with SIGTERM."
https://www.tana.it/sw/zdkimfilter/zaggregate.html


Concoction about Google's behavior originated from Brandon's sentence: "We 
already generate multiple reports to address because of size constraints."
http://lists.dmarc.org/pipermail/dmarc-discuss/2020-January/004326.html


Best
Ale
-- 

> On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 5:29 AM Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:
> [...]
>> What I do is to recognize the ! suffix and abort sending if that is
>> exceeded.  I heard that Google instead do a real chunking[...]