IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dmarc-ietf] Re: New Tack - Learning from ARC Experiment

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Mon, 18 May 2026 11:34 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
X-Original-To: dmarc@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dmarc@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E011F0043EC for <dmarc@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 May 2026 04:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1779104082; bh=rni6ZpBwRuWDSBMVJU4jb6wM9i4yEdb4V9M/YefQ96Q=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=WqzwgPFaf18SqF+bhAQtz/0VqTzl0hGTeiB+8wpQOs5Wek//ZTlzN0loQLS1unJ5O KOvLXbWmzpxqOts6hbxxa7/Je2QTkQL3WH6xIaHoK9UEd9GkY8J8Bt4e6d06zWruRx wZhNL97ekERZdlDAhc4IaF8GS3WErxPVmmbdR26c=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
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, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PhHGwVX1dW1M for <dmarc@mail2.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 May 2026 04:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [94.198.96.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 291E8F0043E3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 May 2026 04:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1779104078; bh=3EvHOidnPQa3BPC1D+Yt8yhrP/ZMdtMYmNNhL8yzeqo=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=DH0WjVcf3RTmh0XgTavSNyvmjwonhvcmK25ysJFynglfTMRSHQC4F9zuY56dgx6eq V9J45USHHkE1vR6D79az+d5Q1glBJfUBBY+lkfNQLQMqo2Jvx0rvRyutcdwxmi3ZDE WrC7I+t6XUqQB72gHUCiGJ7ku5OpHWAH/DfBhX5TnDQ00+RHchmeGW7eTVAGI
Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Re: New Tack - Learning from ARC Experiment
Author: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [192.168.1.176] (host-79-45-70-17.retail.telecomitalia.it [::ffff:79.45.70.17]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3,128bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC028.000000006A0AF94E.000052D2; Mon, 18 May 2026 13:34:38 +0200
Message-ID: <62fa575c-9d13-4980-9080-9df1b5c9336a@tana.it>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 13:34:37 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: John R Levine <johnl@ietf.email>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
References: <IA1PR12MB653180F1812B340891121599B3382@IA1PR12MB6531.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> <2bafa613-1861-4dd1-8e15-e400b73ab50b@tana.it> <CAL0qLwb5ED=o+=OGrGr=eW4nX-A9DR4BSDVSkzsNtDr0kShyqA@mail.gmail.com> <20260512194027.262BE1099FC6B@ary.local> <274bc4f7-9fb3-4f1c-b202-0e13b17ea465@tana.it> <CAL0qLwY=Jyu5dhQfd94fWdJ3X=hp0dAf9a2Gf65VRNA8Ga9uaA@mail.gmail.com> <d68908dc-4032-420f-b89c-749a75cde2c0@tana.it> <3e73dc4a-1c7c-44f4-0910-9bc261ff46a3@ietf.email> <343588b1-1238-4195-846f-eecd185b682b@tana.it> <924adfb1-22db-d750-9169-9d88f23e3728@ietf.email> <37750f9c-80ba-4ab1-9a92-bc4144484508@tana.it> <e788146e-cd06-a975-1bc9-e9b201050f90@ietf.email>
Content-Language: en-US, it
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <e788146e-cd06-a975-1bc9-e9b201050f90@ietf.email>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID-Hash: REUYGLMHFJNLMUQOBGLLR4UXUOIEK4DO
X-Message-ID-Hash: REUYGLMHFJNLMUQOBGLLR4UXUOIEK4DO
X-MailFrom: vesely@tana.it
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dmarc.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: New Tack - Learning from ARC Experiment
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/7CQTp40kpYmagj7TZjh6lsEpTw8>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dmarc-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dmarc-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dmarc-leave@ietf.org>

On 17/05/2026 19:25, John R Levine wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2026, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>> The question of authorization semantics for indirect mail flows 
>> concerns the design assumptions behind mediation handling in general, 
>> not necessarily limited to ARC as deployed.
>
> Again, I don't see any interest in this and for myself, I do not find 
> the model of senders authorizing subsequent relays to be useful.  What 
> do you specifically propose to work on?


You're right that we've seen little discussion of forwarding 
authorization on this list up to now.  However, I don't currently see 
another way to obtain deterministic behavior in the problem that ARC 
aimed to solve.  Hence, I think a document that analyzes ARC's failure 
deserves at least a section considering whether such a mechanism could 
have led to a different outcome.


Best
Ale
--

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status