Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two new fields in aggregate reports

"Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com> Fri, 25 October 2019 15:21 UTC

Return-Path: <kurta@drkurt.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 15F3F120123 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=drkurt.com
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 9xfu5-0JNtd8 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55274120105 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id p6so2835774iod.7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=drkurt.com; s=20130612; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LYCcQxEOdPL1Rjva2LgwDB4UFoMTNMa733RLJYlhWLY=; b=ZyxcvZeMCgSKPFfyaOZvLWfbj/8ICCT2WotI2qT0p41WOVwsLDK3AtzX2KzrdXTBvB B6tD3qWrMMfib855LRDYoVVDcPihjALKNUdcnQBInINVHo4libj4pPWJOw0z+hWXFzsl 7N1pjZgGR3Tc0NA1ZblF1smbYRk/CIb4e0TjQ=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LYCcQxEOdPL1Rjva2LgwDB4UFoMTNMa733RLJYlhWLY=; b=O/tCHhAiqXfu1xl8DGiKK0dNnrhKuMeD405yq37LBdkk2giANwppq5OrBz6c2cGcMd JLKjyChgYG2m5Jl3WkZqV9KUXDbl+66q08nRS5rlqyVvLCZzhP3CLBemAQv533wwkbBT 1NfkrjYwwJTAAvdTUFSwpdo8xcshQgNCDWUpmqVRoN6vzRkvVVdYpxOsGeoHrMVi5bzn sl0jHNI8rWZu7H/FZVcDEpplVN7xlICGlZpSrzvA6ieUbQUKOaeUHEClf4NUY9s6gXYs SxscU5NsB7Pv4J+wIaJy4sHevbl8rdM52Crb3OrlACfNduxafjrTRCF+s5FgiLuRdnxQ I+VA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUVMiGmOyCZYIX/hb7qor2tq3GP0snj6/H3puSIjbj6RKBlT3Eq ITC5EJ3oX+4D3v2SD+muMsuBRsqi/n4ldAIz4c9aiUxuZWs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx6T45OeCE2Iinmf+/uPxW5VESgp5Tn6TYE7YLTPfCLqoGTQCilnv36Zcfx8o61kTCEuqGyOhzm9t4U0yOaUIA=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:b710:: with SMTP id g16mr4433915jam.111.1572016893868; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2c9f5a36-105f-22bd-2029-cb66867355c2@tana.it> <e5bc55efd6ef01ab849505a0872c9dc9a36e738f.camel@aegee.org>
In-Reply-To: <e5bc55efd6ef01ab849505a0872c9dc9a36e738f.camel@aegee.org>
From: "Kurt Andersen (b)" <kboth@drkurt.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:21:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CABuGu1r4haWcY0UrOL9gsiNxi95wrTxn20bqvpWbnaYTwtc-ag@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
Cc: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>, "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a54220595bdb417"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lgFwGKG36JKERx-Q9p3-FQ6EjAg>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two new fields in aggregate reports
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: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:21:37 -0000

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 3:52 AM Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>;
wrote:

>
> If it is a goal to reuse the dmarc-reporting mechanism to report also
> about perceived spam probability, then it can be
> discussed in more details how this can be achieved.  My experience is,
> that asking a provider, why an obviously non-spam
> mail was evaluated as spam, virtually never leads to a useful answer.  So
> nobody wants to reveal how its spam system
> weigths factors and if there is lack of such interest, extending the
> report format will not help, as nobody will be
> willing the report the data.
>

Especially when the answer more or less boils down to "lots of recipients
treated messages like this as spam". There are so many squishy terms there
that it is essentially meaningless.

--Kurt