From nobody Fri Jun 9 08:49:20 2023 Return-Path: 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 8E1F4C13AE51 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 08:49:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=tana.it header.b="kwG3BXGF"; dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it header.b="Ci79inZ+" 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 HW570JUZwHzh for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 08:49:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [94.198.96.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AFB0C15109D for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 08:49:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=epsilon; t=1686325750; bh=GxnTH9xUGSfDOEuBV5EEHXuHJvR9GHjVzbpo95/wSyY=; h=Author:Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=kwG3BXGF4xdV1DP0glJBcuj7wYOlEiP9Y009wJ/6txrS4L2Jsc1EDUBHBVgmUHv6D O4bHTQVIUgC8p6nLwBwDw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1686325750; bh=GxnTH9xUGSfDOEuBV5EEHXuHJvR9GHjVzbpo95/wSyY=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=Ci79inZ+R7TNL0o9aKl+WuJNBt1vzkYEX05ZatNd9t9r5O/6W0BKYdh9mWAIHxsrx ceXLCdeHyyYSZUCAe8JjIXkXJBMP1ujmt41PL9PUHsGFXgD0EsdFeU43CXdAK7ga4w hrvZn/VzjsQXUZQhJDRGgZf4Paf93a5kekoWdFD+pTCQNwKnfGc8D2zzpM6ry Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC2 & SPF Dependency Removal Author: Alessandro Vesely Original-Cc: dmarc@ietf.org Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC09F.00000000648349F6.000026D4; Fri, 09 Jun 2023 17:49:10 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:49:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.0 Content-Language: en-US, it-IT To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" , Barry Leiba Cc: dmarc@ietf.org References: <30BB83B2-B454-41B8-992B-8E2569802D9C@1und1.de> <7f854d28-d3b5-fd00-4613-b8baa1217bd7@tana.it> Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted) From: Alessandro Vesely In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC2 & SPF Dependency Removal X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2023 15:49:18 -0000 On Fri 09/Jun/2023 16:07:07 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > And signing software shouldn't be mutating messages ever (other than adding > signatures, of course). Section 5.3, Normalize the Message to Prevent Transport Conversions, gives different advice. UTF-8, though, seems to be subject to mutating fashions; conversion to 7-bit form, IMHO, makes sense only if it is base64. Quoted printable is messy and prevents recovery after MLM transformation. Best Ale --