IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft-crocker-dmarc-author-00 ?

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 17 August 2020 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 049AA3A1064 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:16:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.089
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.089 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=SIIZsMCJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=IiCJPDZA
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 8zcT-H3_o_5T for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:16:43 -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 8838B3A1062 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 61077 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2020 20:16:40 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ee93.5f3ae5a8.k2008; bh=Wg4R3eU/5eQsmxf78D4fyKPcbkLOZsQuXiGEQfRb2NM=; b=SIIZsMCJ7FExlJp0LwZas/zK1Fv9ryEFAg06lyzG97HHrOgWrK3IGBf7d3T6fHqN2OfXLwzzxW4NT1kXKaE27uCXZvxvsUbzm/19gu2DXCC9x+LjOiy0a77s0y7DvTqudn2uQ2ECuVTmaH7VWDtJCbXCQRG9CMAzk9tSuve58BxYETw7HVae2JPXlK22AByQIKBrZtFL0DkdFYrZk1SKbAN51CLjWNpmmNJ7KiPuxsf6G2gpCRjyKs7vejmnIRGrJW9IjrGfvC1J/KxjKVOGEZ5emaqxPVIx4qA9fO5pfhgXfuI60ePg+HnddVFGmh6OROmmm6LpZ4jcJdh4xgStWw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ee93.5f3ae5a8.k2008; bh=Wg4R3eU/5eQsmxf78D4fyKPcbkLOZsQuXiGEQfRb2NM=; b=IiCJPDZAVrlqy+Gi+N49VSJVH7yejdmSVp/3WYwvpcQoXNaV72wXg+0faqez82wFcWHW45O7e99zr6oS5SxUzExV/wZrv9VuUrgnT4z4APB6aC611wnHKAzpH6Wj2SFuMGiFh/NE4SB4MuvaDZ2O/AraUJSGerHtZMzkWyIXKYkuY7zRR7VRK3GetO15PuEibvv7JLFgcrlFatQ838Zac1uDlaWwm+lBbh2lgAKowKs9s/7j5O6eURfOyLfnluPG9BdM5PO1ihR0Nb+JoxLFK5qJAXBCittZJL/Md7o4MDy8j8zSZy1HUiV5ODfRIaZ9X8p+b7J5IoRgN8ObJk68zw==
Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 17 Aug 2020 20:16:39 -0000
Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8E7351EE5694; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:16:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:16:39 -0400
Message-Id: <20200817201639.8E7351EE5694@ary.local>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: dmarc-ietf.org@lem.click
In-Reply-To: <543E391F-800B-4DAD-9310-B6D121AD0FEA@lem.click>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/ERTPgvSU2cSFcZ0FxQnMgSOvOF4>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft-crocker-dmarc-author-00 ?
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 20:16:45 -0000

In article <543E391F-800B-4DAD-9310-B6D121AD0FEA@lem.click> you write:
>> Why is adoption low? Is that a big problem? Why so few aggressive 
>> policies? Is that a big problem?
>
>DMARC can be quite useful even with p=none. This use case provides 
>insight on what's going on and sometimes, that's all that is wanted. 
>Moving to more aggressive policies require a degree of control on the 
>mail flows that not all organizations are prepared to exercise, IMO.

Quite right. My system publishes DMARC policies for over 100 domains,
and they're all p=none execpt that four which don't send mail at all
have p=reject.

I collect and look at the reports which can be very interesting.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email