IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Reporting DMARC policy in A-R header fields

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Thu, 01 August 2019 03:37 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@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 0E3A6120135 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 OB9fRLTogvmv for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (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 26457120131 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id v18so67786424ljh.6 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:37:05 -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 :cc; bh=RoIKyNpWEvm5OSialk1POqef3I67rBQOfKjXXSpuEEQ=; b=lEu0OCJuT0aimHGfXszG/j8wHlp+ZlUgfSUf6Fq8cjhmUOSm+73xIrOyoIwdjhfRUh MPKzP8kSS3wJC3vIz67zVEx6vzMEbSCOwazAlp3py+mRtYHQnCGu2F0s+CS/gXqoKxJi p6jtRG4IDu6zotBe1ii8TIQYYaN/f7ePGR3V1BjD660ZTd20b9TOjDbRDx1vQA2BSEF4 qHQV/DvFBV6KBExOGI7lls82kOZnUNqd/+pihBbBtA4/V0m4v4mBn/XMIKj7rLS9AajS 0R2wTLruRgCE3FEVFzpH9Q7hr0RRY7QG9qEmPRwNVrDBxA8bnbz2iR4kwgDjeFFE5xOw d1mg==
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=RoIKyNpWEvm5OSialk1POqef3I67rBQOfKjXXSpuEEQ=; b=tVdruy4F6AU29Vy7v7JqI64B90DnZwt6vyi1VvO+V0h/gFsyRJRmwBD/irW8XoHcZY ExKkMhBcCk6/xg80iUQGqF9gEWRymiAQ3bj5CSE5y6BlX5grE33IbDZkmRGT2zDA5ZMp rLRyQp4yBQs4lMYXQ7p02xEbpqH1VQY/CjCpISiKpcwhg5Tbx8N4hp1+XXM7vLSTeZKV 3EWKVfAui1D5mY1e+MMyXGcJwTZulIDTC3YOx5bg2P2ZCMeyPiS60lduzFg2x/Kb+NcE vGH/Abw663gXl8KsJxL9Tyxi0LFXFAPLyopleE1T1OujIxb5vVsThKWlCv5fvJ+ZgOmt Wasw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWSXY58z/I8YXmnqpUVNKSYiJvuu7y8jJbtGGB1/A2I1eL2fCp7 dNX0YA/ZoYWVRhcVlxtKsmKYC1pIvnBi+rDvad/chg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzQLH6/9QVoZ85mfgHSRGAwhgL7JRGnKJzjjVVVnDtOU02M2FmUTZYPGin1IbZradqFOHbV2cPrfG/JYkRJBZw=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:988b:: with SMTP id b11mr65500612ljj.110.1564630623256; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2577720.3ZthdXZjm2@l5580>
In-Reply-To: <2577720.3ZthdXZjm2@l5580>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:36:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwbtq-1UUrK+qGEJaPkoj_kMQO+MTBmkBFe2tNbL_Wi3Ww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000810629058f05f4d7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/Z8pP-JbVosdcPwZJjZ59oIrn6CU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Reporting DMARC policy in A-R header fields
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: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 03:37:07 -0000

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 12:38 PM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
wrote:

> I'd like to add the option to record DMARC results in an A-R header field
> for
> consumption by a downstream processor.  I think it would be something like
> this:
>
> Authentication-Results: mail-router.example.net; dmarc=pass
> header.from=example.com policy.dmarc=none
>
> That would take adding an entry in the Email Authentication Methods
> registry
> for:
>
> method: dmarc
> ptype: policy
> value: dmarc
>
> Does that make sense as a way to do it?  Does anyone have alternative
> suggestions?
>

This seems sane to me, or at least neither an objection nor a better idea
came to mind.  :-)

I concur with whoever disagreed with doing it in comments as a normative
thing meant for downstream processing.  IMO, comments in header fields are
meant for debugging done by things in meat-space.

-MSK, hatless

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email