Re: [dmarc-ietf] ESC for Failed DMARC Validation

"Rolf E. Sonneveld" <R.E.Sonneveld@sonnection.nl> Fri, 02 August 2019 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <R.E.Sonneveld@sonnection.nl>
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 7E1B612013B for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:06:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sonnection.nl
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 RZfzkpAofl_Z for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx10.mailtransaction.com (mx10.mailtransaction.com [88.198.59.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A2441200E9 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx24.mailtransaction.com (mx21.mailtransaction.com [78.46.16.236]) by mx10.mailtransaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460fps5Chzz2qF1D; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:06:29 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mx10.mailtransaction.com 460fps5Chzz2qF1D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sonnection.nl; s=2009; t=1564779989; bh=8TVVJbq5obKWSHQBpSQqtfzq1k9QKz8DibiPHEslsLs=; h=Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:From; b=KgK4vYs83MCPRSrQqo//zxYETmgiQ+7exT5HNdvj/o7jX4rAHpzqOHeQKqTiRA2T4 awmLToEGO6mM3yFGiGipDcyRcYu7oJ2QsH388WATt5/eZa1iHsNeOf6uHmMJNeR6r9 +G14lBTA34uQfhYXkxSGxPjOG1gZS0rI9dOs04Y8=
Received: from tiger.sonnection.nl (D57E1706.static.ziggozakelijk.nl [213.126.23.6]) by mx24.mailtransaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460fpr5t3Lz1tp3T; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiger.sonnection.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6D8422340; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at tiger.sonnection.nl
Received: from tiger.sonnection.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tiger.sonnection.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id YkpV99pQoCXH; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.40.49] (cat.sonnection.nl [192.168.40.49]) by tiger.sonnection.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 75F7142233F; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>, Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
References: <c676b42745c2c8114ec26eb1f405c9eb2e68c364.camel@aegee.org> <22f0d022-57f7-8b8f-0d88-18d1c77e990e@tana.it> <505750d4fb9c03050508255594c55f4517da3e6d.camel@aegee.org> <CAL0qLwaDdfq6nkKubh2B=7PTZDt9E271z8tnq2bF-9KbwQQg3g@mail.gmail.com> <e2011ab9c66e9559caba22d7fd6d01bbd34345b7.camel@aegee.org> <CAL0qLwZ-gzfD3drxqRHzLChZagMvocUN_ijrMVg_H65AMpHPvA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Rolf E. Sonneveld" <R.E.Sonneveld@sonnection.nl>
Organization: Sonnection B.V.
Message-ID: <9ffdbe9e-7720-0a39-876e-7bfbdd0b9366@sonnection.nl>
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 23:06:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZ-gzfD3drxqRHzLChZagMvocUN_ijrMVg_H65AMpHPvA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/9U6xh5mPKrhmwkE1gwaxhZwXWHU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ESC for Failed DMARC Validation
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: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 21:06:33 -0000

On 02-08-19 22:54, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> The wording you're using seems inconsistent to me.. Specifically, 
> you're saying that x.7.30 means one thing when attached to a 
> 200-series reply, but the opposite when attached to a 500-series 
> reply.  I would prefer to see two separate codes if you're going to do 
> this.
>
> But the bigger question is implementation.  Who would make use of 
> this, either as a sender or a receiver?

a receiver could assist a sender in adjusting its egress mail process 
without the need for the receiver to collect a lot of DMARC reports and 
analyse them. A sender could use it to improve its outbound mailflow. I 
doubt however whether anyone will implement this as it assists possible 
adversaries as well...

/rolf