IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Clarifying the value of arc.closest-fail

Seth Blank <seth@sethblank.com> Wed, 03 January 2018 23:36 UTC

Return-Path: <seth@sethblank.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 D6806127058 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:36:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=sethblank-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 SRfCouyhj0Ip for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:36:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua0-x233.google.com (mail-ua0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::233]) (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 EFBB71241F8 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:36:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua0-x233.google.com with SMTP id g16so8909uak.2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:36:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sethblank-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=y/c547qa/AzS5QqkmfUFEfd7Gm80IjQLv/u6n/Ing80=; b=1kr049/XzzHi1ujyEQskJymq7xwBObQ1Y0MBp8S9nU8vIFiU630EGWtUfOarlePP3V QVpRfr74KVCqMh8NsT4X3E0c9G86dDDVM40UVTeX5QhsJ8CXqWNzamD84V6xh/0A3Fi/ TmNlfpFj4RST8Zy12whl39VCU2R0NxJvKGkZwmydftV7lbN9oC8Pp4o7nPIEYa+SKozu fVFKeDcWFgOCpVGKgWJPqPwzF1Qh/UeIM4O7stUDHdIxQbMQ0+c06kMd0a/k/OB3ag71 DcZq/sXXcM4se+qS+URdJ8JS2Lf3S1YUZPc6a6LOjulmhfBN7Fi7rtBTQ+jDS8ccp+Uy tS0A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=y/c547qa/AzS5QqkmfUFEfd7Gm80IjQLv/u6n/Ing80=; b=NJVJUxK+BqMFe5DdBSJewrxOcY4nXtGC8teWmuzrWjQ/7eP0ROrcbRXMi6V2ab8wPU in9FkhuL2WEz2RTpdItjGx5wM1eTuJKzof/K2LOsKEjI8ixkcUcrj9SQfIjXth1dbzbG lrzCNUUtgew52mFhKK9sCCNP51709vl4NwWQSdPwtt408zlXi+fwuSHopbjX+FQiiA5C b14Jk8CzksKYe6Xi5EyxOhfmQwATJMl4N/ajB2MQDuxzO8dh/X5KBFa0sftmzZ4x+SQo yALZ52Ln0HZkjG6IBlzXL1IJezw5sd8WWfFB9MAQtt1gfSK2IAaRgWDqwjalBBb+6Owp VyTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mLtVh67XdSa8QdB7rTHe/+z7JUeb6XbZvqzPh0wI3Y0pkxOBRBf YBLIFOOokyG2fGGH1T4wfaYaNIc33QvSUDbDYy+FjOCq
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosJabjEdweqpUrLxW1a30C3e/WFdhSNxEieQwrkGbVZuDtD1LQELakci65VtxlGaIndw+PJO+JocDRHt9cRx9U=
X-Received: by 10.176.48.89 with SMTP id x25mr3115458ual.45.1515022579647; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:36:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.33.165 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:35:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABuGu1pv3kdhnbi3mxB2wNp2T6GafTUngR+NpZBoXaJRrQ1B-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABuGu1pBqv9uPQg7_XR42cUCE4x4rWbN2hgxx7ZAbWugHT6zkg@mail.gmail.com> <1514939995.3318165.1222346488.5B169072@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CABuGu1o5sYiLXQSBcUdY6fiBQuO6P+fwTXD5BAR1wsieGO237A@mail.gmail.com> <1515021640.3106167.1223502368.3DB28018@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CABuGu1pv3kdhnbi3mxB2wNp2T6GafTUngR+NpZBoXaJRrQ1B-w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Seth Blank <seth@sethblank.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 15:35:59 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD2i3WPum3O-3bYQdWOhDVUrjfq0PDWC3cmTTELeMqgguNECJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4030437d0c4afdfa40561e7ae96"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/ftVBgcExMNKHtEmYUjBSbMZbll8>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Clarifying the value of arc.closest-fail
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 23:36:23 -0000

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) <kboth@drkurt.com> wrote:
>
> Very helpful - thanks. I think that expressing it in the positive
> "oldest-pass" form makes the point much clearer. Unless there is an outcry
> from the rest of the group, I'd like to change to this terminology.
>

No objection

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email