IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis WGLC - Issue 144 Mention of ARC in DMARCbis

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 01 April 2024 23:05 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 53C9AC15107A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.848 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="O42obQVn"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="BhYDTK9+"
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 OFHjooD85qRX for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A56C3C14CE4D for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 52363 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2024 23:05:03 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=cc89660b3d9f.k2404; bh=Ilx0aWwyH0Vb+R5y/PQPsq0F4rjloKB1/BPmcADxu1Y=; b=O42obQVnjV4/4dBCfbZFvBUqE5f/y1S4OjTRRPdwuHzBt5KQlvITWD0MnwWzuEWmXoM3SkAyNj1weZ7qSbMNa5G+VXfNoTU9ZIFKdFceFsJdly5LTPvz/3TmWTmeU0XEz8AHMvcQTJH5Yx8FMSZZN1cj2jVtrJ221CoY17zGf5aZ6xBwDyFJwIzLYAPJf87fzz74Yi3ZChVWYAcE8kzzVFjzG9ytAB+h5jSIz5+ZYLNlQ2CCgMvYsIo5iS++bu42i5LYa2Ll3c65/WDbURFHxG5sGzunKKIz/GQ9XZWSIJ1xQeuP76QqyUkLM7Bt7tWQbc/P/WM685an6n6KIJr83w==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=cc89660b3d9f.k2404; bh=Ilx0aWwyH0Vb+R5y/PQPsq0F4rjloKB1/BPmcADxu1Y=; b=BhYDTK9+cL5uVtOG7FUtrtxWp/TPKlQI8asarrgFfx/kvyZ9ge+sO5jXfphSyJEsDforfu6/foBgnlIo99b8et5bDHQr6lLwkvYrBhiR3edGDtrC90RZZoKS7xxwELxDdJh0ijebc3mvg9TxnVY+9uuyUDNHImC8PQYbPjyvtXOStJsB5I6bSQOXR/NfBgZ9nn4DpmA7OeM0oJDKrtTD2OSgXar86GqLTbhHQy+JcrooaTn7RHDWJqgssaqFxC6RXcRVtxfyzS5fSJR+r/xfxJk6QG3oDa1W+SLLpBXfBwxPfakFyrTEJnjuAYYeouuvAsHRbXddv+tDJaTcQuni2A==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD) via TCP6; 01 Apr 2024 23:05:02 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 531CA86A7CC2; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 19:05:02 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 19:05:02 -0400
Message-Id: <20240401230502.531CA86A7CC2@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: todd.herr@valimail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAHej_8x7jGiMQmuJR8qnp5ET8i_Xqz1p4YSeM6RkeY3YiNfaxg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/fyjbqD2P6uK67s1tk10zboo4_TY>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis WGLC - Issue 144 Mention of ARC in DMARCbis
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 23:05:10 -0000

It appears that Todd Herr  <todd.herr@valimail.com> said:
>Issue 144 has been opened for the question of what to say about ARC (RFC
>8617) in the context of indirect mail flows, a la Murray's example text
>from this post
><https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/v5NMVIZqvRuEfopf7gc0Q1i4Ywo/>:
>
>"One possible mitigation to problem X is [ARC], which provides for a
>mechanism to demonstrate 'chain-of-custody' of a message. However, use of
>ARC is nascent, as is industry experience with it in connection with DMARC."

Generally OK but nascent seems wrong for something that was published five
years ago.  How about "ARC has found limited acceptance in the industy so
it is unclear how much help it will provide in practice."

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email