IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dmarc-ietf] Re: Discussion Thread for Issue 155

Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net> Wed, 23 October 2024 23:55 UTC

Return-Path: <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>
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 CE1A4C1CAE76 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <sYqDf9SvTFbl>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Improper folded header field made up entirely of whitespace (char 20 hex): X-Spam-Report: ...T_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content previ[...]
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 (1024-bit key) header.d=bluepopcorn.net
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 sYqDf9SvTFbl for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from v2.bluepopcorn.net (v2.bluepopcorn.net [IPv6:2607:f2f8:a994::2]) (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 AB893C1519A0 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluepopcorn.net; s=supersize; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fcdZbRrmptIontxTLVQWoS8uM5LDLGCrXH8zUcArzdU=; b=m+dqFnUEEaNxjyHv6CseXb64UW OFykfDCvrBOZ1kMHKNMMXZbRY7XGmSN3s/6ernI9SqUVpxR1+csjGzdYhrf5wPCb/HbybRUb/IFg3 pDE+80byFDRXkdlmKC1+7skTftX3UWUr0Niq0/sdpjK4twZLb/5/paAoEcHDKqyfcLCI=;
Received: from [64.71.6.2] (helo=[10.100.9.254]) by v2.bluepopcorn.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>) id 1t3lCC-001Dfq-2M; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:55:20 -0700
From: Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:55:19 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5852)
Message-ID: <EC5CDC57-24AA-4EEA-B1B3-A0186A659BF0@bluepopcorn.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYqrf=G2ws1e05EUS2JSaU=KyhcXF8OUJ5aXV4nvKXVFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHej_8=Gs0XURT4UVrKxxfc45BtVDmPRgGT9rvxDHBbzbd-0bw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwY0PjxkTAkSEwB_s6KgAODFAB8z665wKY-pLJ16UT8oXA@mail.gmail.com> <21B7963C-1CBC-4017-98D7-77749FDA6B3E@bluepopcorn.net> <CAL0qLwYqrf=G2ws1e05EUS2JSaU=KyhcXF8OUJ5aXV4nvKXVFA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: UBGG2F2AVAZFUPWWIQJKMKOH7YDQ6BII
X-Message-ID-Hash: UBGG2F2AVAZFUPWWIQJKMKOH7YDQ6BII
X-MailFrom: fenton@bluepopcorn.net
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
CC: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: Discussion Thread for Issue 155
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/cg55bP_oYyXqzk4lLyqT3KeypxM>
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 23 Oct 2024, at 16:35, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> DMARCbis appears to address this via the text of Section 7.4, which in
> essence tells senders to be careful about using "p=reject" if their users
> might use lists,

Section 7.4 also says that p=reject can be incompatible with “alumni forwarders” and role-based email addresses, neither of which are under the control of the sender’s users. For example, my alumni address forwarder breaks DKIM signatures in messages it sends me. That means that it’s never safe for a domain to publish p=reject except possibly among a closed community of domains.

-Jim

v2.43.4 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status