IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Call for Adoption: DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 25 September 2020 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@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 38B283A03EF for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, 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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ig1cQLmTOcha for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x331.google.com (mail-ot1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::331]) (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 6CFEA3A03EE for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x331.google.com with SMTP id g96so3262424otb.12 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=TDvv1kTRJIYGL4i3H6tDP2XlwgkFPuJgd7d0k0N4vII=; b=ipQh2hJo3Qt1m7ob7w6Sgm7ztBzOcWQ7XON1/r3ndHd+mCZw21aTyhIFbqam+WIMOY mwXOt64pdywNCjZLpBs4wmdUHwpd5m6aJ70ac2zz+lqM22roYEc4P3x3wuGppyskmgeb TLRKd1p3NqOg4FfgS0isPn4HlPJ5Ihd/yfoDHnFAcmxss0QFoiaSk45myFxjwewbnw7i fFOM8hE+BqYUWbJlfZKk3T6Ue4RtBZSMrf6Cncx3QajpBQgnX05BfP417nEl0iJY0Z/K FRi0WUE3W5ltJusuzeYDBcF/zwf3kefqFRdk7WU2JqMWYJr8lBdNwRpvDbHMFmAD/pNr QAiw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=TDvv1kTRJIYGL4i3H6tDP2XlwgkFPuJgd7d0k0N4vII=; b=FK/ptsxZG4JkMCCCZ5JoEe73k9N000Yw9ciINefsleNOwvTmZw0r4SY7/Z3PPYLfyP Gls4zHhMVBIekF3B9zQW0FcOE/SwYgordlRQlPn7kcblenjERT8pgLwYkS1fpbHCPKFV nbDbL9TJKrgGqZJjnDjD4cqii1y0HBr+o5czVEpLSafzOZh3EfxygEBMj7+POrpUJKR4 ju8NU4h/uN2YKxMaYS/w/isaZLNxUIgRa7NfX9sLuNdM0/y2gJ/yrD9J8zKSGwTKH+i5 /Sl2smM6c9bQ2AC1uwrVOpigM8KEKZCpOQ0UtGxhZOMBL3LvXaTIriD1px5HTsL7X+nq aYTw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532JBIoxL64mBQwvRLffWyamOwgfkV/zb0dWaZVUAUI0jVgSzkpK LOXqvtJv95at39+x9JXz5WKTPeEYKDXOnn+YfG6Eo7wokdI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxRFVdA5mPWc1ZOesNga50L9PjaZkgeaxPgRJG+Y08IsOi7iHNaS71UKmkDsDeL4Sm3cYCVUfBdUjeD8Yo6EB8=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3b84:: with SMTP id k4mr1364761otc.4.1601060393515; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200815225306.967CC1E9E41D@ary.local> <c1679087-6c6e-7147-fea5-b4513f2c060c@bluepopcorn.net> <5F43576A.4050905@isdg.net> <CADyWQ+EM400Zk-xM_JBhFY1QppOyCrxt7e0XHxpjhQ_LjG6xgw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+EM400Zk-xM_JBhFY1QppOyCrxt7e0XHxpjhQ_LjG6xgw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 14:59:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+F2+pHm2TiEBHWfTnq09icJHw0NW2g-kpq-XOMHXVPizQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000004fe4905b027ec8c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/RBeQp5sXth0_dZK64SpssAC0Z4E>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Call for Adoption: DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field
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, 25 Sep 2020 18:59:57 -0000

Dave Crocker reminded me that we were going to adopt this document as
Experimental. I was remiss in not mentioning that.

Even though the WG adopted this document, it was said during the call that
the WG may not be able to come to a consensus to move the document
forward.   Adoption does not mean published (see: ARC Usage).

tim


On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 10:01 AM Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> All
>
> This call for adoption ended a few weeks ago, I have been recalcitrant in
> following up.   The chairs feel
> there is enough consensus to adopt this work in DMARC.   While there were
> issues raised, the chairs feel
> they can be addressed through the document process.
>
> thanks
> tim
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 2:00 AM Hector Santos <hsantos=
> 40isdg.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/2020 3:09 PM, Jim Fenton wrote:
>>
>> > On 8/15/20 3:53 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> >> Assurances that are provided by ADSP are generally obtained out of
>> band in the
>> >> real Internet, and not through ADSP.  Current deployment of ADSP is not
>> >> recommended.
>>
>> > Is that not exactly the same situation with DMARC, except that the
>> > policy in question now is "reject" rather than "discardable"? Yes,
>> > it's just a keyword, but it reflects the semantics of the expected
>> > action as well.
>> >
>> > -Jim
>>
>> No one was expected to follow a reject, so it was said, until it did
>> happen.  SPF pushed
>>
>> --
>> Hector Santos,
>> https://secure.santronics.com
>> https://twitter.com/hectorsantos
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmarc mailing list
>> dmarc@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email