Re: [dmarc-ietf] Sender vs From Addresses

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <> Tue, 30 March 2021 04:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27383A3C64 for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tH1S5ZQn-AKf for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78CC13A3C63 for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id f19so2680725vsl.10 for <>; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3r2LXGQ1l+RaV2LPkz17/8QCzL2G4dYVcpyqiddMCNg=; b=TsH8ppQuUq1lVg9O3lF83NikjCkD5grGXhSepgbyuCgiQBUfuSvZC8TBBaz6B85xVx 4jRBWrsU5HQ5o170BPD9dwWe6MIkCI+iU7ce1WeUPhlZ5j7kGyTCFAWQGAfw1Jvld8RI ApfGNFnB7qRpctkHJAs4/0t+e/6fpqBCDzgD9YJsAatuh9bBHc9qc21z6oK5eZ50JflK tLfswr4yfiSBQuw6p2nr8rgi2CrXdzAlBrSXPcyUPO0MHyYFA5W0Yz9RbxgfIautS/BA mQsIQQUQcgELi4ZW1kIM3067U1Tw6n/oE083XWc6zNU3uDuggbJh5qKcYEpoFBUfokry wgFw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3r2LXGQ1l+RaV2LPkz17/8QCzL2G4dYVcpyqiddMCNg=; b=rAw6SfTQfILyvf3kXO4yiCmFZNUZce/ro+m0UroPWCZZQvorvwksBqp6lf2mxqQ/1r vEA/cu2y/QCKnLAtDucBPNpE2gnq4g199H9eLx940zEEVBALouteBVpPTZ2zfNn6QjrP QxoJJHiIsFz0wevUEoEwaaU8xfJ2o1/Khq7V1cJPpLam/4CHyr7fqReHfR8zGNkyXsDk u6FlGBkEIxtxl7NYX2AwEgzaKJeTbfXmYJu3h8bJbtv+h2Ng6SHeyRvrPB+qi9iqKGYA x6zodx5M9rMMeQF1XY8eEongrJEKlr30IJesK6rczpjGaNVoV8WhSHGwEIT+0PolePw7 uwrw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532h3Acw3aic7y5g0rNyiEUcbMVoIAPcAWDQdd+lJ6RMx8TrL+SS kCw8+pKTWBStH2ROb44PPzH4tjozcFL9RRlfhiws6VcM
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykmgCCBMOAj0xdIj+bMkhdmnQuviI15iATGIo23zW64JAEBL2h990njI3QFdY0AIZ57B0A8EqOk9+kvEaKUFQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:4201:: with SMTP id p1mr3107395vsa.33.1617079978844; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <20210324202058.91E777134D1B@ary.qy> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 21:52:47 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Charles Gregory <>, Gren Elliot <>
Cc: "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b6650305beb9c546"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Sender vs From Addresses
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: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:53:05 -0000

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 2:39 PM Charles Gregory <>

> I DO think this is an unnecessary problem that CAN be fixed/improved in
> one of two fairly straightforward manners through DNS (behavior switch or
> list authorized alternate domains).  And I can't see anything but upside in
> doing so; nobody has demonstrated a downside anyways.  Yet I have no idea
> how such decisions are made or the part that anyone plays here.  I will
> review RFC 4407.  Thanks.

Even if ATPS had taken off, there's a matter of scale: Very large mailbox
providers like Gmail, Yahoo, etc., would need to find some way to populate
such a list.  They could let their users do it (though getting users to do
more work to manage their accounts is certain to be an uphill battle with a
lot of configuration detritus as collateral), or they could try to automate
it (a non-trivial and probably open-ended engineering investment).  Neither
path is appealing.