IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Call for Adoption: DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 17 August 2020 14:27 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 BEE1E3A156C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:27:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 X73v4uYT5qNG for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 168FA3A0C54 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.178] (c-73-158-217-238.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.158.217.238]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 07HETm4R024678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:29:48 -0700
To: Laura Atkins <laura@wordtothewise.com>, IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <CAJ4XoYcFbh8-nAxjxzzRgUahFfhcgcZQ2yMF2ewv_-DgUmhL=g@mail.gmail.com> <20200814164237.313071E971DB@ary.local> <CAJ4XoYeqj_5mpZu1PZP4rNfrWRyC5gC-2dfK7oX9xQHiR24QeA@mail.gmail.com> <085c6a5f-5451-ae8c-4873-133673ba1754@tana.it> <CAL0qLwaVUi9QtV4zcCwncuy4N3YPwsGZPzFfd1q19io79UG2VQ@mail.gmail.com> <c1844590-4b12-9763-21c5-6ac5b730321b@tana.it> <6358f3da-806b-f4eb-b9a0-8ee8ce4121d7@dcrocker.net> <4e549ca6-6047-6ff2-325c-fe8d7247e157@tana.it> <c972e0af-b589-1780-47b3-8cb2a2024ec2@dcrocker.net> <13a0ed72-2c5a-8ba6-84ab-b857e29403f1@tana.it> <b5935bde-e8-78ef-ed17-90a1d730aa9d@taugh.com> <8CCCBF0C-8651-4298-BB29-457381655D1D@wordtothewise.com> <beba49bc-e599-4f5b-72ad-2328938af9da@tana.it> <7FC8E909-1A13-4682-B3D8-EAD76F2B02BB@wordtothewise.com> <CAJ4XoYcx=doEfrN2M=X8OZQF0Nq+AFRLYqTgrsr1zMFSJVwziw@mail.gmail.com> <7C25FA42-6C6B-45B9-8476-B74F2455EDDC@wordtothewise.com>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <5e4c9533-52cb-5923-54b3-fcc2bf80bc20@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:26:54 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7C25FA42-6C6B-45B9-8476-B74F2455EDDC@wordtothewise.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------094C40A936E19C1D4957F3D6"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/7DEy0RPwmpGAJoG0ktID9mtk49o>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Call for Adoption: DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field
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, 17 Aug 2020 14:27:05 -0000

On 8/17/2020 7:00 AM, Laura Atkins wrote:
>> I think the most
>>  useful thing we can say about the FTC workshops is that they were a 
>> forcing mechanism that instigated a lot of effort and innovation in 
>> the space. Some of those efforts fell by the wayside and some still 
>> persist.
>
> You think? I’m not sure I’d agree. I saw the workshop as mostly a 
> political (and educating the politicians) exercise. The effort and 
> innovation were already there and being done by a lot of people who 
> weren’t there. I’m kinda bemused by the importance folks have assigned 
> to it in relation to the vastly different email ecosystem we have today.
>

This might be quibbling, but I think it kicked a bit more energy into 
the anti-abuse industry.  So, as a moment to mark in time, it I think it 
was useful.  But no, not fundamentally for the creation and development 
of email anti-abuse work.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email