Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #1 - SPF alignment

Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com> Mon, 07 December 2020 11:09 UTC

Return-Path: <dotzero@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 71DDE3A0BBC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 03:09:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, 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 cQRFkmekxV2T for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 03:09:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72a.google.com (mail-qk1-x72a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) (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 1A7223A0B6B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 03:09:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72a.google.com with SMTP id x25so12100658qkj.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 03:09:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Q4X7ci3nO11AZDpO3aOrJLxSMsaVuPa7znfHNpEQJWE=; b=lD1dmG7gnp8K2+3+kkUoevcd3ngsCbXtRL+AFjFwLQgbxWlRAmXUHIgv34a2WKpO3K vu0pOPVVpTxxTZhHLMQ/q/bj6TNRl4EflFSg7eyiGHb3ckahWHBG4rtxaiEOuU5A1swc TMhOLCBsdPiJhnSmgc1GPqUZXrdMrtp8uBQ2ZUKQByICwvjDDcqeNd/AAWEZVrBV4zc1 qXmuxXnBETibrNNnX2k0gz6zFppKNvMvPLcva+ZnITnY/0iZ2OMT5SSa81CEW40GLbLX a8Y0p+fmZ4uLpS4p9AWDQkiGU77wa/BYv2JwO7c0wuyRa0xg3jU4MoWqGAJHF7DqPpbu SICg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q4X7ci3nO11AZDpO3aOrJLxSMsaVuPa7znfHNpEQJWE=; b=YIFLr6ZfLUgRTho5Tp5BxEeapaUm6XNCpNFx0fKI3caF0Mz+TclDROKn88Gd/1v9K0 9lu1Nbt3TG/rLj7bQO0+SEKYcNQ2UxFSQRgEb/nBAmm7u4d+0gQD8yUhP4HCi0Qh/ruM U8QBU4CrU0QqhqhXKs41kjxGfsNcAoUGAs01uIJODLbChjbQW8ttagez66fc2eNvlQD1 V8ljU6QO3QOVROnz3gi8FJlaqRWyuEXZk/BWW4b6I1VolzRdDlKldTrfMQxvD7Yj2yag UhK+jjbjyW8BmiceI/vrMe0BOMPOOpYRJYM5LsRcjnRsQ/9IfN69WTsQ+O57J30pEdcW 9+9w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533avwiqLgzVETSdVbh5/BfCtttg2cOuVBdtWEVmO4M4gYejjB/i zEEeeRpUlKwH2WsJOjanw4rMcrf5JeCiZBnO/aw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOI1HmF7BQ7yIQpuMzEbwMvnKold2DCboVFiDk3FmXwqbPEr3T45BLPm9Haat1wMMRe29XzHJEO/0zYZ2iV34=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:b342:: with SMTP id c63mr23878733qkf.146.1607339366049; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 03:09:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <bef64e7a-571b-a73f-dc91-aa402ca320c8@taugh.com> <CAL0qLwY-X9B6MT03dCYE6WnYOLvBjtiU1e0K6XTbFHY0LwzW-A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwY-X9B6MT03dCYE6WnYOLvBjtiU1e0K6XTbFHY0LwzW-A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 06:09:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJ4XoYcY-tYjd0nWB1yTScWDewJDREBB4oGEMAq4ZHH5jR=aWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f26cc105b5dddb34"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/EWgk4U8TUgNV_UAwJ5nTsSPiCOU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #1 - SPF alignment
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, 07 Dec 2020 11:09:29 -0000

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 2:13 AM Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 2:17 PM John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> We would like to close this ticket by Dec 15, two weeks from now, so
>> short
>> trenchant comments are welcome.
>>
>> Ticket #1 is about SPF alignment.  We need to replace references to 4408
>> with 7408, ando clarify what if anything we do with SPF HELO checks if
>> the MAIL FROM is null.  One possibility is to say only MAIL FROM SPF
>> counts, if you want to align your bounces, sign them.  The other is to
>> explicitly say that HELO alignment is OK on bounces.
>>
>
> I have a slight preference for the first option.  HELO is too arbitrary in
> the protocol for me to put much value in using it in any of these systems.
>
> -MSK
>

+1

Michael Hammer