IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC is designed to break mail, Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 13 April 2023 16:48 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 8A662C14CE4C for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.398 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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="XJ+2taQj"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="ySCGFhqH"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KxpDbTLkAGD9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDFB7C14F5E0 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 39926 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2023 16:48:25 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=9bf3.64383259.k2304; bh=/WxkAEF27bMCwRn4sNZCwyUmQv6GAAwUPBj4L+IMIY8=; b=XJ+2taQjhpmuEWQOoAA3t2JgRgsRJr6O404O/C64Y8vTl8vTGctli247Rs9C4CJDoM6hidhFyCW2vZOU4lxMsXNDvWifU7w52dStwZwsgemY6JRBH5biPBSUCfVcF4/8/RMeXRZPcHuFmkfUe33pRHZ0eOaAzMK008i+AMpmlS/5AAOs9ajwhNcSGYXn+iRR1q3NjO+QEmnZHKEgJ7xvi0lEadQK00+oQpiQWcczRPd9ue6bE4WVr6DliY51HoBVHhKUKiHTAz92wCScuXovFudx1Q95+QJysJ6S4RwdfgKXuQ0uIueBH2A7dcw8nlP9pF4aK2KAvG7KsIUNiJ1i1A==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=9bf3.64383259.k2304; bh=/WxkAEF27bMCwRn4sNZCwyUmQv6GAAwUPBj4L+IMIY8=; b=ySCGFhqHh/yt25hBkTg8gYhXNOxWC10R5XiJ1cTY7yRmAOgRqHlrQBGjQK6t3K06TuJoCI5F/W0gRhO72dg5cDJxSJNLS8RbjnYI2o0yH+fdIgY0cd/05tAL2SL8iJ0vehSz0Rv7ryo6xunTQzxuUL+4ELWxIn1OwDEIRZYaEbIqSHvVA6ZKU+V6qTTXk8rMjgonHhx8aZ9G/S4ItRZIxNa1gkpar0BG8+0/3rYq1IFMEelJoWqPmfbnbHvX15q/o/+0104AkDiXeh9UkuhCTImsupaSGxbKqX1amFA/PpR8UguddDU6SRhm0sLZxPHIhDqZbU7kJbuDig9T4XRhqw==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 13 Apr 2023 16:48:24 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4B844BF18C15; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 12:48:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD20BF18BF6; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 12:48:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 12:48:23 -0400
Message-ID: <8c8717f3-d016-543b-471b-977ba9876d87@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XoYdTNtXEMS8e1_NkquHpf=3PbpTpuduW27VcUL=v_pWicQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20230408135613.C3E1CBC81C2A@ary.qy> <48D13F81-6022-45F8-AE56-20474E68BAA1@marmot-tech.com> <c374e371-4560-9cb5-138d-09a3ef352bbd@taugh.com> <CAJ4XoYdTNtXEMS8e1_NkquHpf=3PbpTpuduW27VcUL=v_pWicQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/I7Crr1FgqrdcZDmT-4KvCc1fr58>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC is designed to break mail, Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 13 Apr 2023 16:48:56 -0000

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023, Dotzero wrote:
> It also isn't that " IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOUR MAIL GETS LOST". It matters
> but there is a calculus regarding the tradeoffs of a very small percentage
> (in the case of my former a very small fraction of a percent) of email not
> getting delivered vs the damage caused to recipients of malicious emails
> involving direct domain abuse. ...

Well, yes, I oversimplified a little for effect.

In your case, you know all the places that should be sending mail with 
your name on it, no random third party ESPs or mailing lists, and you know 
who should be getting it.  So if a trickle ends up at mailing lists or 
ticketing systems or any of the other things that munge messages on the 
way through, you don't care about that trickle.

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