Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=quarantine

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 14 December 2020 16:12 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 7898F3A1255 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 08:12:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, 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 4WlccYM_d4oE for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 08:12:29 -0800 (PST)
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 76F2E3A1232 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 08:12:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.62.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 0BEGGFsu019185 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 08:16:16 -0800
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20201211173722.6B4DF29782C7@ary.qy> <ea074aad-971b-abc6-d557-ea2f433b3cc7@gmail.com> <f55992cf-f5b3-42b6-4a38-b184d9243f32@mtcc.com>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <52077ae3-0b6a-8532-d21d-4f5b51413ded@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 08:12:23 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f55992cf-f5b3-42b6-4a38-b184d9243f32@mtcc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/8y530rl6b6aKa2iYYRyAUh5SldQ>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=quarantine
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, 14 Dec 2020 16:12:30 -0000

On 12/12/2020 10:57 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> As a developer for 40 years, I can safely say that reject or 
> discardable or whatever it was in ssp are all abundantly clear and 
> that nobody writing a filter would make the error that you keep 
> insisting that we would.

An appeal to authority?  In this group?  Really?

So that means that my citing 50 years of writing this kind of networking 
standard and seeing exactly the kinds of misinterpretation I'm 
expressing concern about carries more sway than your own experience 
(which I suspect is a lot less than 40 years of writing specifications 
for the public Internet, as to writing them for more constrained 
environments.)

And the above is mostly meant to serve as a demonstration of just how 
inappropriate an appeal to authority is, here.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net