IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC Multi Proposal

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 02 November 2018 09:09 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 EA93412DD85 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 02:09:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=AH6+cqUc; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=aeb0JmCX
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 oUZRfTJTQkPp for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 02:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 D8F5E1277CC for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 02:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 14237 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2018 09:09:04 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=379b.5bdc1430.k1811; bh=AIINM81D+NiD9+FOA4shT/CV/vixiPiPVyqkNHE1lcc=; b=AH6+cqUccyWrGr+fnt+ylbNmOVFKEc9cnmt8jwFShS4GjGz8TcwyTzsnPwrK3ktW2s9df0PRFMd+S6MWXHTnkc9L+2gI7p2zCoi+uKb4PXZTgKzgo3YbPYfXejzS6Owy8Y+KVE2a+A7gFsEXUl8ljxjITMavIn4PQS+pjS7snIyldnCnT7y4v/YPyQ3yrskxqann7Ed6HtzhMTChyd0cbm1unb+Y59lg4oJVbOfLnlTwEtW0DjChlXIM1iWA/aV1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=379b.5bdc1430.k1811; bh=AIINM81D+NiD9+FOA4shT/CV/vixiPiPVyqkNHE1lcc=; b=aeb0JmCX+B6DBVvawGSJlJcegl2FYPK0DC/hPYzTk74GvqFTjCvmpjJJY3usLPTfrBbs8DsxCclJu9wrjNvy7RRg9mtmgv0REnMnEHi0Ije4MmWIfy/ap9SgrFdKoyL3KRfByBtveny4zdfJqo0bKCysKdBdGkSVSrgFHj0NfE3RjlC8ssltPNdI7t0+cC1lP8d67gm2s6yBFOxqc/4SNBrUgxalTqwcfp86fApXRSKINj1OzUX2tZZ9jRbKdiGP
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 02 Nov 2018 09:09:03 -0000
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2018 16:08:58 +0700
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1811021607520.13429@ary.local>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com>
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>, Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABuGu1pCusR+L+QMBbOrODFRyaNbC+JBhHoSd46gGtB95nv_nA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9957335.dUWMaE32Bo@kitterma-e6430> <20181101235621.AF0B52007DFEBA@ary.local> <CABuGu1qOstiqvHfPSnZmfgHXx-VEAq543g9GWjWGaDQ3GxFUgw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1811021550560.13429@ary.local> <CABuGu1pCusR+L+QMBbOrODFRyaNbC+JBhHoSd46gGtB95nv_nA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/CFxV7TGm0VRU4Ja_yHPA1W0y9l4>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC Multi Proposal
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 Nov 2018 09:09:07 -0000

On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
>> I mean ARC as it's implemented now, not in our multi-signing draft.
> It seems like a poor implementation choice to be enforcing something which
> is not part of the spec :-), especially when there are parenthetical
> comments and references to things like ARC-MULTI to warn you against
> leaping to foot-shooting enforcement choices.

I see it also says:

    Valid ARC Sets MUST have exactly one instance of each ARC header
    field (AAR, AMS, and AS) for a given instance value and signing
    algorithm.

I'm reasonably sure that doesn't match a lot of running code.  I'm 
particularly thinking of gmail here.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email