Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=quarantine

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Mon, 14 December 2020 17:01 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.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 8BB4E3A0AC1 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:01:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cMfepl7ndlWe for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:01:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9663D3A0ABB for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:01:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.62.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 0BEH5YBM024831 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:05:34 -0800
References: <20201211173722.6B4DF29782C7@ary.qy> <ea074aad-971b-abc6-d557-ea2f433b3cc7@gmail.com> <6dc2d62e-e288-8d8f-44b2-6f42e7e580@taugh.com> <a57178c7-4b99-85af-3ecd-be4b5aa32432@gmail.com> <B2A08113-E8E9-4D7D-B23E-1DA2280C7D92@wordtothewise.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <65c61813-0d8b-bff7-9f6c-6e01db119b86@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:01:41 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B2A08113-E8E9-4D7D-B23E-1DA2280C7D92@wordtothewise.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/h2oB7Oer3WgI89yudKvtb0VvqYc>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=quarantine
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: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:01:49 -0000

On 12/14/2020 7:31 AM, Laura Atkins wrote:
> I am agnostic about moving the ‘what to do’ section. I think it makes 
> sense to keep the sender definitions and the ways receivers can 
> interpret those declarations close together. 


I'm pressing for clear separation because we've got an existing problem 
-- and DMARC isn't even close to the first case of this -- where people 
over-interpret the meaning of non-normative information.

So, I think that 'close together', as in 'in the same document', is fine 
and even good.  I think that  as in 'in the same paragraph' or even 'in 
the same section' is not.


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net