IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-07.txt

Robert <aradesh@gmail.com> Fri, 22 April 2022 07:35 UTC

Return-Path: <aradesh@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 891863A11BF for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 FAOVrzI6soOP for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) (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 8B8113A03FC for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id be20so1041201edb.12 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xJ1LBnybEE8fioHTXhujVqaxbL569/Ky91bUKu2shvg=; b=UkajfxXvn3rbOVClNOLVHK/v71bRj0VsTcf69XLMzUumi3y7aQlPcre51dnR4y95mT 029waFE+1yTBBaOuioZgCTzthJ+O/FcuJHzc0WGIq1+j9LaWcxyI+GTarxtrMmACPXAK 7Gz9qTLtofZx3EkGHLHhM27StFstz3+oXV1aG1B6v8Ihg1ujguyiN8Fa9QXPhWCFjCdW OvlBwx1YgS5jybVclNO2OvtHW36KtP9W8W6amwvQo6TziSIR3F5i/DAKHYYgZZvldMhj Q+4ihLUShVaWsYl4LYkvPQceQ0lzGABjVu1wiV+IvFvflyESH1sJ4kdxW6bUNcK4jaZe fXkw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=xJ1LBnybEE8fioHTXhujVqaxbL569/Ky91bUKu2shvg=; b=0jcdX3kY2MtfZI/6ToqNSQceW+gSH+7LO4cYRHJIdxq2dSQes//iJL6T3wr+ZcTKxM Qiw7W5zB/YFaIUcA6hQmlg6I8e6joKWLl0gMK8p2FxhuCDRsYJzhsPjgrFPiZ4Ogd3Im aJ28EZfbTnAI2aWyjhFKdU3/dfgWQpIhLvVgst2HLy9K2bj9PpvI9OEcD8vhXS4sSoIF dAiAss2O9jwcgB5M8h9i/TWLEunNHA9m5KD4CswuXKj4sVS/RKmWwc26k236HZiWAtkP SnbbEnjhHVQbwdGFx6B0EZVfO9jWDJ2/BuK4NyOe5RQUopx/xFeqZsiRW+2crrbmVZcm VNmw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530sGJhPxeKV2mlikcWNh/w2l4vX1TSvS3ynqGq2t8kltEeyP+jv jLjwA3qmHJOEQVF55rMlmX0dbtMzoZeXUkTHLJn0PnNO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwa+TLmqUhEb9vVsfXPUM1/5hA5zBthbbsr9Un33QPu7cUuGLy+IMt3AAW2aDuvhLiJt6w6w5P7+ZrnZxqZpKI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4309:b0:424:1907:f73d with SMTP id m9-20020a056402430900b004241907f73dmr3410876edc.324.1650612930057; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a05:6f02:c643:b0:19:cf6d:be22 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <164925666278.4445.13789431014958416691@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <164925666278.4445.13789431014958416691@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Robert <aradesh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:35:29 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKFywTKC3HUz=G2O+YvnbqZ0sqMM9XfUiw=jZMu1PSVqMtPcTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/KQgQ9qZIniTQuLfLGGR-zz2A5ck>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-07.txt
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, 22 Apr 2022 07:35:37 -0000

In section 4.8. Organizational Domain Discovery, we have:

   Note: There is no need to perform Tree Walk searches for
   Organizational Domains under any of the following conditions:
...
   *  There is no SPF pass result and no DKIM pass result for the
      message.  In this case, there can be no DMARC pass result, and so
      the Organizational Domain of any domain is not required to be
      discovered.

---
We would still want to find a record to know who to send failure
reports to no? And this would involve some sort of tree walk if the
MAIL FROM doesn't have a record. Should it be changed to something it
like:

   *  There is a DMARC record at the RFC5321.MailFrom domain and there
      is no SPF pass result and no DKIM pass result for the
      message.  In this case, there can be no DMARC pass result, and so
      the Organizational Domain of any domain is not required to be
      discovered.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email