IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] fall back

Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com> Tue, 03 May 2022 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <dougfoster.emailstandards@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 1E051C157B55 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2022 03:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DVWCnowjhdkV for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2022 03:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x233.google.com (mail-oi1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 5F992C14F72B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2022 03:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x233.google.com with SMTP id m25so3809529oih.2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 May 2022 03:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ETDBidh4f43pTIPMJ7VnsNcAn6c1DoHg1PZUOAA5PqI=; b=hsJm7v6yDgb36vC1pb0FYG4NEvsQlNcecPemh9r9fBvEVfwmZDscDQDif3uQQld6VW V99/zm2KfMzk3USsv0rWlxGYe7Bk9sa/AWhDU4DcUt4WpfZsSxsQzXww3b6LTwIG6iMN YnZ8UDT4PuLkOfpMkPZxshRg9ml0wY1MtrjBXQSF5n9Y9VAkMTSSRDRtUGeNGiCjIzOX wjxiwtTKE8ym8b61O5NrEKWeDLj3XNEzexIxyxwA5VffqdbCtIhA1b4IYt3c0XnglHz5 mJhgSyl0hoQwYQARAs1HEmXF5+TjYNVrO8+dLYl/hEt/EjWiQrXestD3WUBJJPacCjD6 LdwA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ETDBidh4f43pTIPMJ7VnsNcAn6c1DoHg1PZUOAA5PqI=; b=PF0YspUyK0tpa4aAk/p7+/ti/1anS00IhxzEwBxWVYcA2vH+9dSrFlGw6rV4pk3HAR iHiZBG2nwgArxRyblzjAzYXY8YypIO8YkbMWZz31Ehi3lQbuiQo/Q0OLLpFXRr/GV5bs dw7d93TSZaoyeMxQ2hls3yzRJrJIdn13J/VWlW8JDdFXi85CkF7Juo+PARVyVndPKTt7 /bwQfLPMcO75luzOfFFI926jvD30YrJf+15to4PJ+EyRlc69BEVOLl7t+6paCvAUN5lT mgewfgrpCtUBVnnoQrJ4GFKyla7qzdBOis34ZBXGqcoBnOCdH00e+omCJOS60iaQfjbS Ccag==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530R/6Dr3dnfs5XrLZB61I5Cu6Tffy5knuGgK4L/VXQ+M6xFCeTR B5a3k0jQPFBaRNcMlTd86xJFO4Be+NPeALdcIXa7So4Ws/k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzEmEUBlx/4OQHGHZ9BTW75FnKW/MWRnvhMJs01z+kL0WBiD08+Adp89KLFC+l3/SWEJcHgakOUgKPLA1Sa2/8=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:198b:b0:325:c2f9:6705 with SMTP id bj11-20020a056808198b00b00325c2f96705mr1464792oib.51.1651573425222; Tue, 03 May 2022 03:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOPP4WEULiYXeAMYQRcZD4xP56OZ5apZhejTNw2mCXz=BmZiug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOPP4WEULiYXeAMYQRcZD4xP56OZ5apZhejTNw2mCXz=BmZiug@mail.gmail.com>
From: Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 06:23:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CAH48Zfzw+hvLpLH8o+GpzDr=q334x1Dbe4XDui3FQrqkaGdEQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Neil Anuskiewicz <neil=40marmot-tech.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000054b63805de18e7e5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/MQBuU2AAJz4ZzVK9Vw8thYznZI8>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] fall back
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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, 03 May 2022 10:23:50 -0000

That part of the design is unchanged.   We check for an exact-match policy
first, and it is used if it exists.   The tree walk is used to find an org
domain when the exact-match policy is not present, and to find the subtree
scope for relaxed alignment when relaxed alignment is specified.

On Tue, May 3, 2022, 12:54 AM Neil Anuskiewicz <neil=
40marmot-tech.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Currently, receivers must use the policy published by a subdomain before
> falling back to the organizational domain policy (i.e., must choose the
> first record found).
>
> Under the new standard, receivers would discard policies, continuing to
> the next level up. So how would you handle the existing subdomain policies
> with a different policy than the org domain? Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email