IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC bis: ticket 51: disposition reporting in aggregate reports

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Tue, 29 September 2020 22:50 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 7639B3A137F; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:50:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.113
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.113 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 HIidPkvHTWsF; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 8391E3A1366; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.62.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 08TMrN0l031508 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:53:24 -0700
To: Seth Blank <seth=40valimail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <CAOZAAfPVicBggPbctta9w-v5G2cHxMtuUwB-stu+0-KB85hCiw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwZOb00dKfQu5Uraigb3SiCBXwtzhRg5bh9sWv==yBw9pg@mail.gmail.com> <CABuGu1q2oxYq_1ReGzDFj+iRRhsmw=tLuZORxSTXs1Zv4eHqbg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOZAAfMz+eTkVW6Nytpsa1-GaXL3GuULwdrG9so=ybjXo+aS4A@mail.gmail.com> <10f0dc9f-ba9e-1a64-39f6-1d98baef582d@tana.it> <CABuGu1rCKFSENSEwuW-f1S0MvZxyBZGSAdz5G6NsatgEvgfZog@mail.gmail.com> <CAOZAAfPbRi4u-vpUtMXZM618+uH4w9teUPQKWpvTTCKTZn86jQ@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <974d8e44-0cf6-fa06-9437-04fb86ec99ed@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:50:09 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOZAAfPbRi4u-vpUtMXZM618+uH4w9teUPQKWpvTTCKTZn86jQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/JZ3RfuPBet5u5ENAsi7WHBM-A0k>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC bis: ticket 51: disposition reporting in aggregate reports
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: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 22:50:19 -0000

On 9/29/2020 3:08 PM, Seth Blank wrote:
> I don't know of any receiver that checks DMARC, but then doesn't check 
> alignment

It's not a matter of field statistics:

      Since checking alignment is an obvious part of the DMARC 
procedure, if someone does not follow the specification, they are not 
doing DMARC.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email