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

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 02 August 2019 03:14 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 78D6D1200B9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 20:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.201, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=dw03wCJ8; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=e8PCO++j
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 BaKo7rvmYvqp for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 20:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7F5A1200A1 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 20:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20091 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2019 03:14:01 -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; s=4e78.5d43aa79.k1908; i=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=/H1xdMWSjyMv8XbcRtS2ybmmxQOgbS1UwBasfDEKmv8=; b=dw03wCJ8YZErQ5/EXCERZ7Ek3/O+Ldd4YI3+48S7QHtRProrQJo3UEfg7AVF1uibcbFmpmo8ez+LF0zdmc3a4M0g5CAqE2TMwPYkANm+3fo2w7VE/6A2zdnWni1HSy+2s5Euvsyfst1MdNlH6ToloWBTRLXdGUvNxLnSYO9/UWvnyvSVnLqX/hM4vxhUJg66CXkQZoBkLjxaWoiUtT5M6ObeY+S/Sn/oXyUtUPLayRXViyF3fwWxEMJU6Y15dqU2
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; s=4e78.5d43aa79.k1908; olt=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=/H1xdMWSjyMv8XbcRtS2ybmmxQOgbS1UwBasfDEKmv8=; b=e8PCO++jEAXmMAUmFysN0J0JrKvvby6Nq+RzaBEOJ0hLPqmUak0kKzupSBj37cTTQb/QD75hgvy4gLJRTScGrmMRjUyuRncjMvO7U/8329rgSEZVX2E+69OMGX28JO/tqvTJfY6u6P38ykdhdoi2NgpT7YxYrb6fGRzzha9u/8DkiM5zBy/0AQCWCkKRalMDchTWLq0K9hIxE4qDEZJzjOxlZo1Zl8JFlVJGBDRGG9fJLnL2OHE+KDGEAzhTJSxF
Received: from ary.qy ([64.246.232.221]) by imap.iecc.com ([64.57.183.75]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, printer@iecc.com) via TCP; 02 Aug 2019 03:14:01 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2C5AD752163; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 23:14:01 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 23:14:01 -0400
Message-Id: <20190802031401.2C5AD752163@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: sklist@kitterman.com
In-Reply-To: <4600949.rz9u5RyGOV@l5580>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/_5xbO5Wl1XQgMKWvw2zlF8VzViA>
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: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 03:14:06 -0000

Catching up on my mail after a laptop disaster, ...

In article <4600949.rz9u5RyGOV@l5580> you write:
>I think comments should be free-form.  If we want data that can be machine 
>parsed, we should specify it.
>
>I think the above works in ABNF terms.  It's:
>
>Authentication-Results:" authserv-id; method=result ptype.property=value 
>ptype.property=value

I agree.  We all put the DKIM stuff in comments but that's silly.  If
it's worth recording, it's worth doing in a way that we all agree
about and can parse.

R's,
John
-- 
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly