IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposing an extension to DMARC to optionally require SPF and DKIM

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 02 April 2013 00:48 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 97A7A11E80F8 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 17:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.453
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.453 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.146, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yCZiZBtCwIHC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 17:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B2D11E80E2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 17:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 15810 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2013 00:48:36 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2013 00:48:36 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=515a2ae4.xn--30v786c.k1304; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=ry2picfEAvbUZ3CeQIYBnmEs308C0lP/3u34T1vHEyg=; b=Sov0gCmVtvwduFy7P3V+yK99Hft4AQgAvLZkzXuP64Lk0rndi1DL7Pycd7pGFGcFVJYwSZrEN6QGY7+W/sWFjTcN1EWUXOYUpZvHGyyy6FYf98zZzJ9f7+pcQj7pOt2L/OSbVDIqagKx0JeFITsyb5iFsHVTZoix4+QclUVUewo=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=515a2ae4.xn--30v786c.k1304; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=ry2picfEAvbUZ3CeQIYBnmEs308C0lP/3u34T1vHEyg=; b=fUb7ePPY7+jDd+YzbNRez3o1M+zO++3X/0+GQhRQ8EV75LlxrlCSo9Dkx30qlossq3bpUm5MDPWHiW59fDmgKODcyJfTkzOSRCJa3HeSL4mTTUBh4dO7HoIFxMwXjRz6lATrCOgLcp+NmFAJyiy6niFog8IoPfN1jVCnot/Bfys=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:48:13 -0000
Message-ID: <20130402004813.6168.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <77426B543150464AA3F30DF1A91365DE52EA0E87@ESV4-MBX01.linkedin.biz>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: fmartin@linkedin.com
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposing an extension to DMARC to optionally require SPF and DKIM
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 02 Apr 2013 00:48:37 -0000

>If you want to say, nobody else can spoof me, then you can do SPF -all,

Or you can sign all your mail with DKIM, publish no SPF at all, and
use DMARC p=reject.  (If anyone used ADSP, you could use ADSP
discardable.  too.)

One of the strengths of DMARC is that SPF and DKIM are each optional,
and senders can use them in whatever combination best describes their
mail setup.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email