Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC aggregate reports XML Schema inconsistencies

"Kurt Andersen (b)" <> Wed, 31 July 2019 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 162FA12004F for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
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_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f_eSfuGTGE1U for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF0B112006D for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id j6so17143272ioa.5 for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130612; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h+KIMHwOYb7tC2EvUHbdkl1+nHGCS5GwA3wrrKDOTzg=; b=VyG0mO6PBD8yDHXW0pz8ky4iZs1vEIeORoFIt/GIBkdSjyu7xZ4m7XBThrqG3oyekS uXSSZBTxgwlegsN4WKIOuKptxHR/zY8WAguzoKFfxl+LaXjwnW8SSFI7hDNvPTRfb4rD 0RbpZ6Gfq9d0IShJISWVP3/bNlrjWXl4c+IQs=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h+KIMHwOYb7tC2EvUHbdkl1+nHGCS5GwA3wrrKDOTzg=; b=eoPrObbSWtUOzLX8BX7xU09NRmyUnRNQx3HtpuDwJK021h89wRw2zIEc7qja0JkqZi ++YD3IemX1hbxOPC6GReG65JRtEhYNvAVJP91fbjiqC/6IdWfB4Oix9ArUN9qqIjdAMq HOIqYWyyAzuC8RaED9erUrOxzimTr4UGDa3OgSb3t8z3rE033BH9mOi1iWyXMlJ1sLq7 q+isIX11S3wHcpkpO6wjIJ5E5JJjDtssGmPFl1iMaYqn+UAGKczBAadhcINpkHyJn+bg gtl0wQzznJC9a1nPpk7pAm4fURjk1GFcVzcAEV7ge4xU/N7QefcII9J5Ns7facN0vPzz ErQQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUD/2hhWZfHlXSEmGTl8UDQP7f3EKe5x0+UqAtfwVi8Kej/37zA t/SlU70t9D3/hJYT8TPccJF7HxCzhLur/CiRW3Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyhN59c3+ewJQtJtduSos/DAWkj9zrifznqZ7TiIFk0y0EiP7e9R+6vLPy8IzUMKVTaSDA9Pwny8L7bgDoT/Rs=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f607:: with SMTP id n7mr76852104ioh.263.1564585229953; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <008401d54784$f8300750$e89015f0$>
In-Reply-To: <008401d54784$f8300750$e89015f0$>
From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 08:00:17 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Freddie Leeman <>
Cc: "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000da44d2058efb62fa"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC aggregate reports XML Schema inconsistencies
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: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:00:33 -0000

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:47 AM Freddie Leeman <freddie=> wrote:

> I’ve been processing millions of DMARC aggregate reports from a lot of
> different organizations, and have been trying to make sense of them for
> quite some time now. I’ve noticed that most of them, even those from large
> parties like Google and Yahoo!, fail to follow the DMARC RFC guidelines
> (Appendix C.  DMARC XML Schema). I’ve written a blog about this that can be
> found here:
> The bottom line is that the RFC 7489 Appendix C is a mess and contradicts
> itself numerous times in both schema and comments. I think it’s important
> to be clearer and stricter about the xml elements and their values. Too
> much of this section is open to interpretation.


Thanks for your observations - would you mind proposing concrete language
to replace Appendix C? Speaking from experience, it can be helpful to be
able to do in-place comments/markup so I've posted - please make any adjustments in "Suggest"
mode or comments you feel appropriate. The invitation extends to all
members of this group.

--Kurt Andersen