Re: [dmarc-ietf] tree walk and Org and PSD, Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

"Douglas E. Foster" <> Mon, 23 November 2020 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150053A0C90 for <>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 06:25:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.187
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t0tIb2SRIy4O for <>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 06:25:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 394693A0C94 for <>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 06:25:08 -0800 (PST)
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1606141505-11fa313c0131c40001-K2EkT1
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id oQJIYPpAnJeXl8rF (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:25:06 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s1025; h=message-id:reply-to:subject:to:from; bh=SJK8Bxyo1tly8Cf7jaBB3gXB1dlRlIzeSfEHYnyuJV8=; b=lBaQ70XEnxF1txZh+tQIhMg0ZdQzlmboYjnAsR6S65MVGknHQzGTdKoE8YA3JoWRb kAlRW3JMksw2kfMsanqePNJabsSzrn2Cwo8hmih8oDCx/eEWDST5HA0mCL4zOMvPV pYhosUUfSDPEeTLdeB7HtqDTyVvjl+N8CtV8Vq2tI=
From: "Douglas E. Foster" <>
To: "" <>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:24:58 -0500
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [dmarc-ietf] tree walk and Org and PSD, Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
Message-ID: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=b2d8afe180604e19ab24a881d95f858a
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <20201122022346.C039627B3EF9@ary.qy> <> <>
X-Exim-Id: c6254522cc6644528c35fe9168edfb01
X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1606141506
X-Barracuda-Encrypted: ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384
X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at
X-Barracuda-Scan-Msg-Size: 21920
X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1
X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00
X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] tree walk and Org and PSD, Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 14:25:10 -0000

My longest addresses are from, with 6 segments.
Relatively small dataset.


From: Laura Atkins <>
Sent: 11/23/20 8:19 AM
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] tree walk and Org and PSD, Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

On 22 Nov 2020, at 06:06, Murray S. Kucherawy <> wrote:

On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 6:23 PM John Levine <> wrote:
It is my impression that most real From: domains are pretty short. I
don't think I've ever seen one more than four labels long that wasn't
deliberately contrived. Anyone got data on that?

I'd bet there are some in .gov or .mil, especially the latter, but otherwise I think the longest one I've seen is five, and that was not a host that receives mail.

I'm sure we can all scrape our own mail logs for evidence either way.

This might be a place where one (or more) of the big ESPs can help. They're going to have billions of email addresses and know which ones have MXs. I'm happy to ask for that data if it would be of use. 


Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674 

Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
(650) 437-0741

Email Delivery Blog: