IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Thu, 30 March 2023 11:24 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 B1B82C15C2B5 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 04:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.396 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=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=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=tana.it header.b="KI4IHMtb"; dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it header.b="DKtewW+Y"
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 Zl9htr9s7_tg for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 04:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D6F9C151B15 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 04:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=epsilon; t=1680175477; bh=yED3SOLGLdE28SUaRkysNP6wJQ2Wtw0YzCSpCXzs4Co=; h=Author:Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=KI4IHMtbyXpC8Kq/7WuM2bwm77U86gQ4XMJXVFnV9emJ4POM7Jh+yDJoUmp5tz0bN nkuXmpY8WzEl8v4jijZDw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1680175477; bh=yED3SOLGLdE28SUaRkysNP6wJQ2Wtw0YzCSpCXzs4Co=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=DKtewW+Yi8C0Qkd4esH0StKGTxIz/iZ/2tGc1mVq9/GQjUpIlXJI/5d1bUZ705bZN b2lWQEP1EUGWfRBLmMZP3IA9+khOYo9cjZ/SWy0Qlap1QjoBrqG5at5TFDphG1Fro+ uZPRk77jrUHRDQeeFQsLT0tBcAv1YWfjg9jruOrD5m9kIrb7ovIYa76v4PAvY
Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows
Author: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC028.0000000064257175.00000864; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 13:24:37 +0200
Message-ID: <5c3da42b-a45b-b5b8-ab8e-f13c1e43c6d9@tana.it>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 13:24:37 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0
Content-Language: en-US, it-IT
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CALaySJ+NBg9vzqa0_t-sBf7EKXQ3A=DTyy-Vc7M-ZK9-vfJxmw@mail.gmail.com> <6319292.vCqnBZbX7o@localhost> <CAHej_8nd1xyAgwASLJbuJHyXEAfHbjqxNH1XtJxKFyfyOneyug@mail.gmail.com> <13145172.pEV04Z3DvM@localhost> <CAHej_8msLJQ0vbZ2jzitjxrQ1wdim5bHJkiD-QrU5F0EJvQp0g@mail.gmail.com> <FCFEB95E-63F9-46C3-A5F4-FA6B02FA8EB5@episteme.net> <CAHej_8=GbmzyXaeEkyLkv6uKc0-owuMC6UspPNq9irT7nF8b7w@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJLmRyyBLE7ZKy88XUS_hXr9M2uwc8jOCYBrBPeC+pCdCg@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB43519A6CD95E5C80AA1EC2CFF7899@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <13603D87-4FDE-4768-9712-E6DB0818C802@kitterman.com> <CAH48ZfztW4OFm+ZMV=et7+uczj49dfbYT7i0w4LgU7pswuiEnw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwayTG_M1-fSTXiaVM5TS1Vo7X+Ehov2Bov9vCak7gn=yg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48ZfxejSxbsDpgBUcfMDhGcz0QLGZEH6yVRMC0xmEFLksw3w@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJL2nuM6jaQc5ExhRymtRR9mHRPwwEUci0c1VtBzF_+fmA@mail.gmail.com>
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJL2nuM6jaQc5ExhRymtRR9mHRPwwEUci0c1VtBzF_+fmA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lbdV2-WnFvvQoOHFm-QwOE-F7z8>
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: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:24:53 -0000

On Thu 30/Mar/2023 04:01:10 +0200 Barry Leiba wrote:
> Hooya’s use of p=reject would amount to announcing that policy, given how 
> mailing list software works and has worked for decades.


Actually, that's how mailing list software has worked for decades, but not how 
it works now.


Best
Ale
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email