[dmarc-ietf] Re: Aggregate reporting - Align prose and XSD reference for SPF results and values
Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Sun, 15 December 2024 12:16 UTC
Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 4180BC15155E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Dec 2024 04:16:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.104 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
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 mrf3harEMoI6 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Dec 2024 04:16:09 -0800 (PST)
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 ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31AB9C14F61B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Dec 2024 04:16:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1734264959; bh=xUHAwoAUlQ2YUmA7u4wWyXz+sCHKVqPx+/7HMA1NCLI=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=Asck7KiIKD6QPY4G1cS/utrsMhJd0dalxNTJH15FRaulUQwCrqZGhpUjgR7XJnMbM EMaLJ6hxMR29zHOl96uGwCwkYUEuj7tdL26h3RliWJ6AbNrxOj+zCanUC6tn9AsmUf lvHCozBdQKkOvflwbCSQZVtsjhPZGnzo4yf7xdd9jLZa5X+Fx4g4eIEWrupDz
Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Aggregate reporting - Align prose and XSD reference for SPF results and values
Author: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.120] (pcale.tana [::ffff:172.25.197.120]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3,128bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC05B.00000000675EC87A.00003823; Sun, 15 Dec 2024 13:15:54 +0100
Message-ID: <5e9751c3-d79e-42a6-851e-cdd6ec222d89@tana.it>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2024 13:15:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <172ad15a-d99e-27cd-be59-07d25fc2aeb2@vendo.no>
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Content-Language: en-US, it-IT
In-Reply-To: <172ad15a-d99e-27cd-be59-07d25fc2aeb2@vendo.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: BYX5Z5FHAD4GR4Q74SN4E7QU24INWXWD
X-Message-ID-Hash: BYX5Z5FHAD4GR4Q74SN4E7QU24INWXWD
X-MailFrom: vesely@tana.it
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dmarc.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: Aggregate reporting - Align prose and XSD reference for SPF results and values
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/_CVkk104EDYrQ5n8Qinbaqyp1Ec>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dmarc-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dmarc-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dmarc-leave@ietf.org>
On Sun 15/Dec/2024 03:11:47 +0100 Daniel K. wrote: > The prose references RFC 8601, 2.7.2 as authoritative for result values > for spf: > > For the "spf" element, the "result" element MUST contain > a lower-case string where the value is one of the results > defined in [RFC8601] Section 2.7.2 > > but the XSD references RFC 7208 > > I was tempted to just update it, but 8601 allows "policy" as a valid > value, so I ask: > > Should I just add it, like below? > (neutral is reordered to be in the same order as in the table in RFC 8601.) It has to be allowed, since possible alternatives seem to be worse (non reporting it, reporting as pass, reporting as permerror, ...). Perhaps the prose should say to report any policy.whatever in the human_result field. > Should we get rid of the TempError and PermError comments at the same > time, or are they relevant? Yes, please remove them. > Or, maybe it was a deliberate choice once upon a time, not to include > "policy" as valid, and we should change the reference in the prose instead? Best Ale > --- a/dmarc-xml-0.2.xsd > +++ b/dmarc-xml-0.2.xsd > @@ -243,14 +243,15 @@ > </xs:restriction> > </xs:simpleType> > > -<!-- SPF verification result, see RFC 7208 Section 2.6. --> > +<!-- SPF verification result, see RFC 8601 Section 2.7.2. --> > <xs:simpleType name="SPFResultType"> > <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> > <xs:enumeration value="none"/> > - <xs:enumeration value="neutral"/> > <xs:enumeration value="pass"/> > <xs:enumeration value="fail"/> > <xs:enumeration value="softfail"/> > + <xs:enumeration value="policy"/> > + <xs:enumeration value="neutral"/> > <!-- "TempError" commonly implemented as "unknown". --> > <xs:enumeration value="temperror"/> > <!-- "PermError" commonly implemented as "error". --> > > > Daniel K. > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list -- dmarc@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to dmarc-leave@ietf.org
- [dmarc-ietf] Re: Aggregate reporting - Align pros… Alessandro Vesely
- [dmarc-ietf] Aggregate reporting - Align prose an… Daniel K.