Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #42 - Expand DMARC reporting URI functionality

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> Thu, 03 December 2020 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@gmail.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 44C233A097E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:49:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 GNTpUVE3WgVS for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:49:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B48603A09AD for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:49:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id f1so1730533plt.12 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 11:49:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language; bh=bxjHU/aP9R+LYzscsLUtniuZ6fQ2D9tGzY0O6lgr0ck=; b=Py2sDgc9TTWKij0WGsHeGlw4dtAknDFZ7cqbLC823mk0HeXExiXO+btMeh5XRFmrxG ybEIequNN7hpYOgnD5Pci7pAgS9vTMr0gu4m/HQlYeDXzfoDqk64NY/1qXOeiNaLOopW O+w5vhIE+y7eS6/eLTGEJtsXvjhVzHOqeZpM6CJRfbRibuAXkQuVaxQ0zmCiS0QEZE4Z hx/PSavI0JhKq1gZeyyFyZ4H/sATQOe05iJLTlorTW6eGoE/AlR1muPzGBv4DdfnkAhE qMdtmpLQiXQWxI2y02GVr2gjTOUWh93000xAkTQsYmfxj6P0hkY/aPAj+Ou9P/KYvs2W VG3g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=bxjHU/aP9R+LYzscsLUtniuZ6fQ2D9tGzY0O6lgr0ck=; b=drhO/L+SVHLELRCTl9ZoT3jcyrtJ4Ry1heJBQB2f0e5duMsdhJEn+TyzPwy+J1Sbse ery8e939jFu1Ig4jZJXkyqhyHWcNb5vW1tj+aW9r4kMofobLocGR0f+tUAIQj5MzCcZ0 w/sD/Viz9tHziibUo2nP4FLpbjD1fD6pHGTHBvtDX5oKiUxI87jqVbGblKWd30bdPkK2 Spm8kWEHcizb1LFfELSxzztYN+mOhuHmmSTO9DPaDq3xGYEjqyyUAOlu+5C5jjO2zTDN ZjXGjmJB/rPvpsH1ahuHPxTCOnviZx63x6hg5kpt/M6nq1kJqZMqMpgSf0yiUeai9UFX vu7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533AlXbSLt/pyXFle3y5g+7H5l3lJ8IxxcV1HdcxAk1cLR6MGteZ cS+Ags/SwLFFEXi+nReCL0wpA1AMiFo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw8lDdJToOXWWvfrVyGvdCVJ2muQ/rjuiNj4KmoDezHLCHwD39motbnafaOsF6Fa5K1tdUhbA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:5304:: with SMTP id x4mr617496pjh.153.1607024966087; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 11:49:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.62.181]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 199sm2808543pfb.219.2020.12.03.11.49.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Dec 2020 11:49:25 -0800 (PST)
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20201202233432.D45FB28E1943@ary.qy> <f719b86d-9a7d-f865-3e16-10eaf35e0de0@tana.it> <479cfb50-b98e-fbbe-e7ce-375557cd624@taugh.com> <f406f70b-3f98-a8fd-db9d-956c000f5c68@tana.it>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <505bbc06-b0f5-428e-051c-532eba23c07d@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:49:23 -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: <f406f70b-3f98-a8fd-db9d-956c000f5c68@tana.it>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------5DAB542E2B83BBD44DBC3D70"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/CT96uyNNj3q9j9DgyS5tFuwns3Y>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #42 - Expand DMARC reporting URI functionality
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: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 19:49:28 -0000

On 12/3/2020 11:30 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>> Why do you believe that people would not send reports by mail and by https
>> at the same time?
> Oh my.  Hadn't thought about that.  It will certainly cause duplicates.

Rather than meaning the same report will be sent by both mechanisms, 
perhaps he merely meant that either mechanism could be used at any 
time.  That is, there is no need for the choice of the mechanism to make 
any difference in when they get used.


That is, your:

> However faster, an https PUT/POST at midnight arrives later than a 
> mailto at midday.
established a false point of distinction.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
dcrocker@gmail.com
408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2@redcross.org