IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Endless Email Loops with Aggregate Reports

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Sat, 01 June 2019 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.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 B801A12011E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 13:00:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isdg.net header.b=Zw5VTFak; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=beta.winserver.com header.b=TnjEpIiz
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 1VQ-Ipgsfsx6 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 13:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.winserver.com (ntbbs.winserver.com [76.245.57.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B2E1200D6 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 13:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=886; t=1559419247; atps=ietf.org; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From: Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=QCISx8DjF8nekIsruf+STCp59A4=; b=Zw5VTFakwp7Z1eTMKFnV473olI8lBVtYxABcYH95PI1r2F3v+UGN42pD9qYRc8 fsqUez9MlSMflBJa+A80ImXtlTvarMgdNEoT42keW5q6lNQLHtE0M6mnXx9BCni4 jG+97Y+mN8o0+kml/suirXxEIZWTgdNZMCx3zpV9ypiPQ=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.8) for dmarc@ietf.org; Sat, 01 Jun 2019 16:00:47 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([76.245.57.74]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.8) with ESMTP id 211695682.58212.3136; Sat, 01 Jun 2019 16:00:46 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=886; t=1559419067; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=ot0MVez WdQsoqdh19jUOz57uW3L3fG8poZ9r2HNKvz8=; b=TnjEpIizQfNNxd3Ej6J5DXD g2H8h8SUltKC/1VQ7Xft2/khafMO8GcV7UNqwLJPAd8GyopY/ONp/1L8moSuWP1r asrxAfb8xe6paqnFP1Vn+2/+Va277kSWNI9wE2xkdyfxYFJsi/DnEIXU3GWkVqMM zybckIIefIqZygt+JuZM=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.8) for dmarc@ietf.org; Sat, 01 Jun 2019 15:57:47 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.68] ([75.26.216.248]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.8) with ESMTP id 1783922910.9.360592; Sat, 01 Jun 2019 15:57:47 -0400
Message-ID: <5CF2D972.9050404@isdg.net>
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 16:00:50 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Reply-To: hsantos@isdg.net
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20190531175532.Horde.UpMFNBGKjRWB_hCZWHwSUfK@webmail.aegee.org> <CAL0qLwZpCmOV58Zc=ALJzfTsX-4F=5=d882+RYyRXFvkhb4PSQ@mail.gmail.com> <f5c5ea46-71ec-4fdd-36bb-fce37271d894@dcrocker.net> <B21CC6FB-2F2C-4AA6-8DAA-05B026DF0E4E@fastmail.fm> <CAL0qLwYb+giO9_HuZ2zXHTO5EgHrN+a2ssTOK+gRAx1-DZydCw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYb+giO9_HuZ2zXHTO5EgHrN+a2ssTOK+gRAx1-DZydCw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/czcXm0h-GdlhNUMPzvAeHhS7VhQ>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Endless Email Loops with Aggregate Reports
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: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 20:00:56 -0000

On 6/1/2019 11:38 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> My understanding matched Dave's originally, but then I found this:
> https://www.ietf.org/blog/iesg-processing-rfc-errata-ietf-stream/
>
> It's not surprising this sort of need to record a deficiency for later
> handling has come up before, and we've adapted a way to deal with it.
>

Interesting.  How does this change based on the document status? 
Would you care if its informational?  Normally, you would not? But 
DMARC has broke the mold.

We seek an IETF standardization of a DKIM Policy system. We need to 
finish this work.   Right now, the DMARC method has the attention. 
There is going to be lots of work here and unless the 3rd party 
question is addressed, I expect the same ADSP scrutiny for DMARC.

I agree any suggestions for Informational Status document change 
should be held for the PS work.

-- 
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email