IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Fri, 14 April 2023 13:30 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@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 B155AC151B17 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qgam5TnkeXcP for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 417FCC151B14 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-94a35b11c08so430482066b.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1681479011; x=1684071011; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=aJ3WUEH7jqyUOceWJDvqzDi86uyBFXa0VxZ0FICuiGg=; b=lA3MvXj7DcKal0xRFpW4m+XwxQYMfRJSgiDduqKvxNQzMQ+rm2XjBSLm/9qC7rJvKs Gq2HuiSmEE6sKUkz0oguqAJCkyi/PM7rm+af4P5RaezWluVaDHt6lpPAZStx2uS5ceqC 4s3UOABSYiOA02/ZCWa8241Mi81O6bKvpHGngS1qC+T34Hn0pI+9xcqDJ+DZ2bM3sTPu ndB+2YcM7X+O2ftoh0FE54SUQYtqIuXfjcTvE7uiPCimcXzdClm23Tap0YRpFPxcWZA1 ja3i553E5/CBI8KB6tLRb1xvoEAvcmunCv1bvZqWBhg8xomd707lv6pyM2n0wvqleL26 UmbA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1681479011; x=1684071011; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=aJ3WUEH7jqyUOceWJDvqzDi86uyBFXa0VxZ0FICuiGg=; b=KuKxcXIRaR9K6MmpUkb5mUa2sVu7FSQcB5Kk4/9BdfvlZtzamurt/+06ORsjWZ0hSz 5Qt+S0DatK+45APeZDpwopKdDsRi6j4MIIwZau1rKmHraOcpxFL4nHmLE59/jGJOzxhD w/CCdES6bmFjmEgZCvDt9VF0o57kdD1rfyvglnxo/B0rMIO4w3DmS7VoyuydUhhAR0w1 /N/8QUH28+ce5vEM5xusP4rdfc44+zW49AzKLTjtw40VoizFoFItQ84+CMOsDQj0IKHW fjTr+V/cxeELcqkeGwl33e11lhvVrWQcIQN0jfFm2kAZlBeO+9Ng25cQzFyKZ9uby2x0 Y9SQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9dRSyF+Ky+USoR1X+4MXqI07oG2qX2HWMqLFXpqKxZZBbsiOXh1 PZVuuJ8yxk38fMsHWdjUlw1jCSqObtQPPKI/xIxGpMAv
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bTBpnmUZlJP1FkYfyVDpQSckgCQXuYmegTd95UcZPvscpTxmL1YmKQBkbBijEvwrCnikmNu2U4LqxhSLZFv/Q=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:9e45:0:b0:4fa:3c0b:74b with SMTP id z63-20020a509e45000000b004fa3c0b074bmr3081264ede.3.1681479010689; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL0qLwZc2X7tyP+_8vvL3Yb7uJk6td3XGbsXUB68BNUEMhV4yQ@mail.gmail.com> <8d970e6b-8fa7-da85-5c47-d485abbc43be@crash.com> <CAL0qLwZJjBq0T8kODJifTT10ttJJE2Bof5kJZACRTwyauzwQ6A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYcHeFe0kS9QHz4fP5TbOMOiW8mJaiNYx+Yk8keZYW-yDQ@mail.gmail.com> <b6a2b444-de02-9833-fe7b-fc9ad542f900@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <b6a2b444-de02-9833-fe7b-fc9ad542f900@tana.it>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 06:29:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwYwcXTBzqd=3sKwtZJUsEYO5kfv9V-CZtVHz2TQ78v=0g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000213b6f05f94bd795"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/6Z0YNTfG_P3MrguNORu2WR1zBxE>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 14 Apr 2023 13:30:13 -0000

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 4:31 AM Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:

> Heck, MLMs should start rejecting messages sent from domains that publish
> a
> blocking policy *when they fail authentication on entry*!!
>

That's not enough to avoid the damage we're talking about.


> From: rewriting is the de-facto standard.  In DMARCbis we can only
> substitute
> "de-facto" with "proposed".  Better methods, implying different, possibly
> experimental, protocols are to be defined in separate documents.
>

Are you suggesting we put that forward as our Proposed Standard way of
dealing with this problem?  It's been my impression that this is not a
solution that's been well received.


> Let me recall that when I proposed something like that, I was told that
> that
> was phase II and the WG was then already in phase III.  So, let's complete
> DMARCbis /without cannibalizing the spec/ by saying that it MUST NOT be
> used
> (as it is being used already).
>

What you describe as "cannibalizing" is actually a matter of presenting the
correct normative advice about interoperability.  So I don't agree at all
with that characterization.

-MSK, participating

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email