IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domains

Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com> Tue, 28 July 2020 21:15 UTC

Return-Path: <todd.herr@valimail.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 4B1143A0824 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:15:37 -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, 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=valimail.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 SsfMbxVXjBIA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729]) (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 7D03E3A0808 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id l23so20242237qkk.0 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=valimail.com; s=google2048; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HPtMlFOtjUnfF8HuUkTct8Gfb3qJk4frg+DiZOg6aXY=; b=cWWAw+dmq4lUkinnhK7z7zRPxyWg34N1KfzHkxM3fGBa5zegJVclr/sQl+hll5T1/t temM+vktB8cUeFjaUu57n3S67dA7/XNBJPHMra7Eu0CHN3ZyXhY4Ikej6eRdy/JH01vP IIXjoTsCqEBa9MHWTZ2qg2yjvW8DL5KN+enr2n+v/tUGA5YkrSMGe7LG0OZlGS4IVHMw 0XF+NF0dlDMS7f7+ySCSGiwEUA/5oYvcs0WA0TiL9/ivf6ZT1zwgcHFE/+ygwIDU8zhz 60ib6ZZf2Ka6R/u7Vf2Ik5HeJjlvYfp8vYikU5U64lEv3o+4K+jxKdkQdZrntNmf/4wH g+Tg==
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:cc; bh=HPtMlFOtjUnfF8HuUkTct8Gfb3qJk4frg+DiZOg6aXY=; b=unUf3U7aJZ0gz4E580QD3lTLVcW9qLotW2r8VyPUmFSs0Ft646S4FwsHBkST+x+rZ6 JgLvpOC+CV9ny78w2kBjADtj79uNZ79YrUBVNcxfUk6uAV9q2KJ0jSnMbG/cTRMy9F2F PtK+Sea5mUwGKLTCZiGz7AmHu5s85MW4d7x/cBX2HCrg+vl6i5Jt8Ms2xY29Js5jtVTA b0iMYncPc1YIDC+dEk9ibtLA3bAt7EsQGk4vLTsr1QhICHF8vTopVBz1xeSsfbpz9o8S rHhy1WLYjPogAWTzsB8A7Uefb6H3VvrV9KmZbp84+5u0TRdhfEw8f0bWaC9rNWFZFkh0 v7gw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533wKZ8Q/Y2bbLm57adGykSookh7FEvXmjmyIcZ4pcIiRjWY1FZM KHZQ8yuCWduCXqc0qAxDoemOynuuomlRnALgErVKl6lO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzCkRaLRTxrWIavlsW2z4WENEqbFmvE3Qb5FzC4tEby04IxSvb+Q0fr1kIHjQcbEvz+NnPThs63VEA/QzrGBVU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:230:: with SMTP id u16mr28022644qkm.387.1595970934576; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:15:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BY5PR13MB29998094418C8A6C25902569D7730@BY5PR13MB2999.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <20200728173716.068CB1D9840C@ary.qy> <CAHej_8na3MLm1i4AZzgbL=7EZ7QBX8OvSB4BOqHg-1osBc4H_w@mail.gmail.com> <655df0e7-4fef-e441-9a57-df4a10aa1fa3@taugh.com> <CAHej_8mztD91jeSA3S=ypdJO7B+9AhM+2ox=mhWOfz--3b0Aog@mail.gmail.com> <BY5PR13MB29993AD874B3A34BA088D87BD7730@BY5PR13MB2999.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR13MB29993AD874B3A34BA088D87BD7730@BY5PR13MB2999.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 17:15:23 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHej_8mVQX4WKHR0P0O2AAJQmUtK9saOcsnLuWipKMwR9hio3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Autumn Tyr-Salvia <atyrsalvia=40agari.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a0b94a05ab86f0e7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/U9704EN5eI25Rr2YfMcWTZ6846I>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domains
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: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:15:37 -0000

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 5:11 PM Autumn Tyr-Salvia <atyrsalvia=
40agari.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> To Todd's point, I think the answer on which policy would be applied at
> least needs to be predictable. If one receiver chooses one policy and a
> different receiver chooses the other policy, that is going to make it
> significantly more complicated for complex organizations to implement a
> DMARC p=reject or even p=quarantine policy.
>
>
Yes, yes it very much will.

-- 

*Todd Herr* | Sr. Technical Program Manager
*e:* todd.herr@valimail.com
*p:* 703.220.4153


This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email