IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Sun, 09 April 2023 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.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 40EECC151520 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Apr 2023 12:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=isdg.net header.b="hUNLQ15M"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=beta.winserver.com header.b="roHNJXBo"
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 P07iQ-bl-KyO for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Apr 2023 12:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.winserver.com (mail.winserver.com [3.137.120.140]) (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 E7C4DC1782C0 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Apr 2023 12:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=4492; t=1681067506; atps=ietf.org; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:From:Message-Id:Subject: Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=78lhjripK0GukpNBzkfbjA6+iby7zhX 8uFZ9MEimj88=; b=hUNLQ15MWjvDufnzKTBJlxpnHXrVCfwqmFqOGcu6RA49NEo PYF4Dlmtmyg5ofJ5P6mVz8yeYJRSAucJI8sNiQPniWXGDeYNzQQJ32Bxgq7tLjbY g60TaEpcfTQgk5tpkN2ACocusrJVU1PUrM3j/7oBE9x7LmYw8SI2D8WuqeE0=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.13) for dmarc@ietf.org; Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:11:46 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; dmarc=pass policy=reject author.d=isdg.net signer.d=beta.winserver.com (atps signer);
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([3.132.92.116]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.13) with ESMTP id 1460308926.1.3528; Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:11:44 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=4492; t=1681067499; h=Received:Received:From: Message-Id:Subject:Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=78lhjripK0Gu kpNBzkfbjA6+iby7zhX8uFZ9MEimj88=; b=roHNJXBoLqx/rHC/PDvNZ/BrLkV+ cYtLzARi63aMJdn9iHpCTFyQC04yS8aQoQtnDHdTn85klcRwgEwwskcdWi3OkRCF N39mxDpNEERUaP03H3ygFLwmZax+AIGKQ1/U1dcdZsr81VGjdezOf9eE/SiGlDO5 kOGULUetj1C42jY=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.12) for dmarc@ietf.org; Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:11:39 -0400
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([99.122.210.89]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.12) with ESMTP id 1906340691.1.14904; Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:11:38 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Message-Id: <B3F0D732-49AF-49E9-BF7E-861C46F25BC4@isdg.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_EF023E11-7107-4858-959F-68D3F84FC8E5"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:11:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJJQ-Mh+=EsmA7QatrcCbCSSTGHt6fRGWequ+KCH3adYUg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Jesse Thompson <zjt@fastmail.com>, dmarc@ietf.org
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <20230409005207.DCA8BBD1CC17@ary.qy> <4a0dba74-3e25-b9cb-dd64-20bf04ae76ba@tekmarc.com> <7b599a98-922a-44db-af91-2f8aa0f74181@app.fastmail.com> <CALaySJJQ-Mh+=EsmA7QatrcCbCSSTGHt6fRGWequ+KCH3adYUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.400.51.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/l8yTJM-owtmxc8NYttBfm3uNouE>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows
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: Sun, 09 Apr 2023 19:11:57 -0000


> On Apr 9, 2023, at 2:33 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> 
> > As Todd previously stated, my preference is for language that
> > acknowledges the primacy of the domain owner over interoperability
> 
> The problem is that IETF standards are about interoperability, not about anyone’s primacy.
> 
> There is an alternative, though: we can acknowledge that because of how those deploying DMARC view their needs over interoperability, DMARC is not appropriate as an IETF standard, and we abandon the effort to make it Proposed Standard.

+1,  please make this an Informational status.  

> 
> I see that as the only way forward if we cannot address the damage that improperly deployed DMARC policies do to mailing lists.

+1

In fact, lets take a step back and split DMARCbis to:

DMARC-Reporting 
DMARC-Policy

Let’s get reporting out the door and spend time to revisit the DKIM Policy Model via DMARC which combines two protocols.

With the ESP now honoring DMARC as is, the middle ware is forced to take drastic changes in order for the “mail men” to move mail.

Thanks Barry.

—
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email