Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definition of "value" in RFC8601

Damian Lukowski <rfc@arcsin.de> Wed, 01 April 2020 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc@arcsin.de>
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 98E993A0862 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arcsin.de
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 pERfKB43wbKc for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scalar.arcsin.de (scalar.arcsin.de [185.162.250.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA01C3A0805 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=arcsin.de; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-language:content-type :content-type:in-reply-to:mime-version:date:date:message-id:from :from:references:subject:subject:x-amavis-category; s=dkim01; t= 1585773831; x=1587588232; bh=5EgSFrym1mG9wkMgUXhPMa68yO6qwM1almF lc/jCYdY=; b=NUc/ohxjyGusBlg8vXELIUAsfivpzLfmVNaEuqqGj8raFDvb0zA nPrWxAUQ8umsBnIVizYIYvNUDMou0euAjfsue2Np9exXEh/RilWwWVIfr/SyoxQX 95Er93k4djp0lpR33Ns0c2+fowD7rEEmxd+b/JvIBdJwepw3etWMUzTQ=
X-Amavis-Category: scalar.arcsin.de; category=CleanTag
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20200401202923.5828B16E2E06@ary.qy>
From: Damian Lukowski <rfc@arcsin.de>
Message-ID: <5c650beb-f0b7-5cae-3070-b7005dec9dbe@arcsin.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 22:44:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200401202923.5828B16E2E06@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lQwqHZFU5HtQsooVNwGUFNFchNo>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definition of "value" in RFC8601
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: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 20:44:01 -0000

> It's the one you found.  If the authserv-id has a non-ASCII UTF-8 character,
> it's invalid under 5321 and valid under 6531.

I thought we established that as soon as the authserv-id has non-ASCII
UTF-8 characters, the mail is automatically - by definition - a 6531 mail:

> As a close approximation, any message which has an x80 bit set in a
> character in the header is an EAI message.



> Right.  ASCII mail and EAI mail are handled as separate streams, even if
> they share a mail server.  See this old blog post of mine:

I'll look into it.