IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] easier DKIM, DMARC2 & SPF Dependency Removal

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 22 June 2023 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.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 8675BC15108B for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.553
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.096, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 xwDM-K_ExL_k for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-f43.google.com (mail-lf1-f43.google.com [209.85.167.43]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 2495FC14CE51 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-4f95bf5c493so2897822e87.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1687453698; x=1690045698; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Y2796rqqt8rfQxQkU9hPR8+no/2x2WjRYSyrG8G57w8=; b=gMwbN7ZGfEONyifJL/28XwUJ7a9zf+cbV0/CPM7Gymk4OMYQdR+o+JlrGF5lLBns9V chUYpbSFz906Dv2uR1ZlltF42mr5goDK9gwfQA3e0tDVN2e0AOfc1RWJsPhAKGw1h19D xMeqiCe3ZhRw02w94+gXhQFILS1jt6QOQTx5flBIqgKF0mELe0pH1o+llXleuaMHZ/Zt Menn8CZ9qFKKDFbV0heGmJvyyOCkV7Myr1m2l1/v1it15uEQtaixusYLXXXQydajtQON /Z018DzpjWw46+k8gDK2vIpbrLMXgoTiGbo8LF9dRuuAK8zj+2ZEH4CmmhSxWWKR4gdm fQZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDxAT+nU3n9U4epSl1HsDYMf4G7MxrIA1KOCPiqu/TYLf2X4ZHGT BjnMORlfFKKfnHKwaCyAATSdYJg/XVS72i2BXPY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6AeJuQUCeoIt/9eJGRCM1YEpi6n+G6JpLyDX9EjvuTZQzF5GGHaS9DJRXqdU60kIDOT8pnr/CstGvQI00t9mI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3109:b0:4f8:6534:9a5f with SMTP id n9-20020a056512310900b004f865349a5fmr9860235lfb.36.1687453697711; Thu, 22 Jun 2023 10:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <30BB83B2-B454-41B8-992B-8E2569802D9C@1und1.de> <D225D7FC-C570-4B63-A694-9F16DB1F33E1@kitterman.com> <CALaySJKwuOK-81dW2H9dtURxa5mLQDUNo+MWcs+Hho8N+yP9qg@mail.gmail.com> <2817813.dRqVH37e0G@localhost> <CALaySJJbPFBAV_7mZaARYWuMzuX+74r2Cm0jD+z92_iuFRn_MQ@mail.gmail.com> <25736.57534.195344.782189@fireball.acr.fi> <1ec42959-977a-9ce0-907a-83a5eb2b6ef2@tana.it> <25739.5435.550786.601699@fireball.acr.fi> <25739.33240.127804.524371@fireball.acr.fi> <5d9a0b0f-8777-2494-d779-376c6ab8b37d@tana.it> <xtudkqv5sqxs4c2nnilna5lf4b266br4xwdjwoq4fdyjpgzjln@xdb5rldfeini> <3087d0fa-91b4-62b4-fc64-a705c7f0b672@taugh.com> <CAHej_8=VnOC1Pms2JKJYG=2Dqtp2nc9oe-j=aEmNfvGuNhvzZA@mail.gmail.com> <a9505fda-ed21-1fc6-adb6-f231225a1ceb@tana.it> <CAHej_8nNGQR9Bm59dsu=XG7iBGyyW=SCh4=0cBM8NWodHyo6pQ@mail.gmail.com> <2de0ca2a-2c18-91ae-f306-38e70aaebf8e@inboxsys.com> <CAH48ZfwjMEwG=b7EsKkXQLzPgcysMLOj2QhZ7_8fs6uQ7zxXYQ@mail.gmail.com> <2080c6e5-2b57-be82-995b-a0986c3a45c5@inboxsys.com> <CAHej_8=7M=zJB2ENbnEQfRMfwEXDnGo61jHE_qQPTc0V9tFMdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwauT-Fq-c5ubf43S7O8Likp+Pjj8SoE2uDNisAZMWfLkA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwauT-Fq-c5ubf43S7O8Likp+Pjj8SoE2uDNisAZMWfLkA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:08:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CALaySJJ7_v6k63mcPOn7HnqXSnkFZhuK70M-LtpVvSYzzObtKQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lNspIdh-SHYhH8HhkxC5u324mdc>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] easier DKIM, DMARC2 & SPF Dependency Removal
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: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 17:08:20 -0000

> I concur that this isn't really a problem for either working group to solve as part of a standard,

Well, the part that the working group needs to solve is whether the
challenges of getting DKIM right are such that we need to retain SPF
to fill that gap, or whether the issues with relying on SPF are more
significant.  I think that's an important part of the decision we're
discussing, and will be a significant part of judging consensus on
that discussion.

Barry, as chair

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email