Re: [dmarc-ietf] spec nit - which DKIM to report

Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org> Fri, 21 June 2019 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
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 79C1A1200F9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 12:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=aegee.org
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 YEOyfJm6nzoG for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 12:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.aegee.org (mail.aegee.org [144.76.142.78]) (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 F39F112009E for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 12:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: mail.aegee.org/x5LJsli6002639; auth=pass (LOGIN) smtp.auth=didopalauzov
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=aegee.org; s=k4096; t=1561146889; i=dkim+MSA-tls@aegee.org; r=y; bh=sn5lRExYtmjSlbbxFcUocFQmaQyBLOjYApGkdtke4Ys=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=XmqHTasbiE6EHP9hFVrlzUwhm9+gR9BXe0qf7z+RF8YOIr4OWsICJ+N0IHuSsICNR 3dDSmdkOp4odEthBV90bahYzM5biBXciNNxRb/MO5TOx8YmIBeizdBSphAQh+kjS/c +52woqPPTcdHZpEs+DnMtystgUHeIUlC/G4VKVizj4+n+zXS0cKvyi4uR5hPd9N0vM G1eI+Cb84JQE2/wTt7MrSW0iBBpjMquhD+25LxLZs1d0z507neqaQdbxVWQ9fPcqjp /csl3Rtv+57WqH17Yd25ylKMpaF7ttpHVP0hbk14Yt6GK8t1hmdC6dZQoeE2AZ4fwH GdtbaY75rcrAOUVmOLmAjpRPb0qxHN+8dYSlGRvoPr+EztHvsQc+0Y6C8+k+6J5AvN ax3KTNCMHFQ99Ig6CCtjVysmOF5uROF/K6bm17DRvGt8+9uZw7rfnjOXV+XqOXRwVm 14tkdxrHypNprpud2r5gC2BTVoqA/abb9kQAhQNA1Arjwt5cJK1QBC5xhQLp0iZSEp 0Aqlkp8OoUEA2ZfSNuqLKmWa30N/9I85PERpCBFJHxBZOH8DzL36LjqN69Ow4fCYQo 6JHyeiNpV67bmbmLoWkHBnsD3yD2O73+LW4Bs+SPH2N5c6Q6pwhgUGrGIE9p5TfnSj x+QldcYp/jPd6rp4idimGTgs=
Authentication-Results: mail.aegee.org/x5LJsli6002639; dkim=none
Received: from Tylan (87-118-146-153.ip.btc-net.bg [87.118.146.153]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.aegee.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x5LJsli6002639 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 21 Jun 2019 19:54:48 GMT
Message-ID: <9ce26c4362b42bf2bf47beb81363775c942b441d.camel@aegee.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=94=D0=B8=D0=BB=D1=8F=D0=BD_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D0=BB=D0=B0=D1=83=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2?= <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
To: Elizabeth Zwicky <zwicky@otoh.org>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org, tki@tomki.com
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 19:54:47 +0000
In-Reply-To: <8C941177-5B45-4B69-A2CB-C774BFB543FD@otoh.org>
References: <20190621184626.AE1B52016298ED@ary.qy> <8C941177-5B45-4B69-A2CB-C774BFB543FD@otoh.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.33.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.101.2 at mail.aegee.org
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/JO1f8F_OL4DO5VYNSpTwk0V-aiI>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] spec nit - which DKIM to report
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, 21 Jun 2019 19:54:55 -0000

Hello,

what is the purpose of the aggregate reports (rua)?

Regards
  Дилян

On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 12:06 -0700, Elizabeth Zwicky wrote:
> I believe they MUST contain any aligned DKIM signature regardless of validity and SHOULD  contain an entry for each domain, selector, result triple. 
> 
> Elizabeth 
> 
> > On Jun 21, 2019, at 11:46 AM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>; wrote:
> > 
> > In article <7cd366d2-ab8d-cce8-67ff-59b79183cd67@tomki.com>; you write:
> > > As mentioned by Elizabeth recently:  (Elizabeth please chime in if this 
> > > doesn't capture your meaning)
> > > 
> > > the spec does not define *which* DKIM signature should be reported in 
> > > the DMARC RUA created by a receiver.  The proposed resolution to this is 
> > > that if the receiver does not provide the complete set of DKIM 
> > > signatures found, they should provide (in order of preference)
> > > 1. a signature which passed DKIM in strict alignment with the From: 
> > > header domain
> > > 2. a signature which passed DKIM in relaxed alignment with the From: 
> > > header domain
> > > 3. some other signature that passed DKIM
> > > 4. some other signature that didn't pass DKIM
> > 
> > This seeems overcomplex.  How about saying the reports SHOULD include
> > all valid DKIM reports.  If they can't, they can't, and I don't see
> > any benefit in offering advice on how not to comply.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > dmarc mailing list
> > dmarc@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc