IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tree walk nits

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 22 June 2022 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 B759AC14F725 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 08:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.86
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.86 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=PpuFLk6h; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=RXjYJ9lf
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 m-seBd32bp9Z for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 08:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 E73D0C14F727 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 08:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 92781 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2022 15:07:42 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=16a6b.62b3303e.k2206; bh=fjMG+ee3pLLsGM99Pc8254SSUG34hRb5mFLNxMTC8Jg=; b=PpuFLk6h6jtcPYfAU7tOS5DGbxkdJVEPvEuxFONcl8RXE5GKLzdi38t3afZko7eCDvHUAwztrM0ATJm9I+WdgmllNyG6/8J06EwTlC3rVvabSRS5+ZX/Kg7eiKLDyNaJbHsR0Tcx4BnT1XOUVCnIGMJ9xFKSGCydksw+JqaPZM0OJtpeOJJiO0Eh/AeHwkugaEAeQt7N9zbxu/JqWjFv8g2WNE95AIoyONRahgpLjX4ypBCA/VeoQT21SiAe2V1DUsL+mM63zG3A9dkWDAEPvcTuUDwvSw6QEJOeGv8qLZlWrxg+BAnnICR6jtPl16DGxmjxqvx4mLastgN9tF/0Ng==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=16a6b.62b3303e.k2206; bh=fjMG+ee3pLLsGM99Pc8254SSUG34hRb5mFLNxMTC8Jg=; b=RXjYJ9lflnZZTZlrhB/zD8hmx3H4y/sB9ZhJHozQtoeLuQPTgmaUCarU4I15ShbouKPP3EOEIXftwZPzZ4pxCgpWJXN5Ksc5YhHrm1zYAtOc8DSaLNS8MX+dtEV932PTJ9ATE/1eJlV9kIsEnD1Sm6FIz9LqP1SUoHlFmjLhS4ZqR9y5HRtLxWxF7mgtjMZYBB3sUW7cJRAR4jasiFbsJGxXFSbVybDOw91uM200+bGlGSvFNcF9Rs7s9Lr6CM7Tw4XRkerpkh2rHk0qoK2hWfoiVxOBJdVxG6WfUCYw7jEvO/fwIkZitfWL+ZfGpCfTp0eBTkbm4vh2CMmrQGr4OA==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 22 Jun 2022 15:07:42 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id C9FDA4419500; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 11:07:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 11:07:41 -0400
Message-Id: <20220622150741.C9FDA4419500@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: sklist@kitterman.com
In-Reply-To: <AEDAD5B1-E526-4949-829A-2CA7843FEC5C@kitterman.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/m4U5rouBK5rOQ8E1RiFCyILk2P4>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tree walk nits
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: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 15:07:50 -0000

It appears that Scott Kitterman  <sklist@kitterman.com> said:
>
>
>On June 22, 2022 2:54:28 AM UTC, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>It appears that Scott Kitterman  <sklist@kitterman.com> said:
>>>Not confusing is indeed the tricky part.  I think what's wanted is shortest that's longer than the longest PSD.
>>
>>How about this?
>>
>>b.a psd=y
>>c.b.a NXDOMAIN
>>d.c.b.a blah
>>
>>What's the org domain for e.d.c.b.a?  I think it's c.b.a.   Is the policy domain is d.c.b.a or b.a ?
>
>I think that because of the b.a record with the pad= tag that's correct for the org domain, although I'm not sure why anyone
>would do that.  Without the PSD record it would be d.c.b.a.

Imagine that b.a is something like co.uk, abd d.c.b.a is mail.crumpets.co.uk.  I don't think that's a great DMARC setup
but it doesn't seem ridiculous.

>For policy, it should be b.a, but I'm working from my phone right now and I'm too lazy to look up what the draft actually says
>(vice what I think it says).

I think we agree about what we want it to say, you stop the tree walk when you see psd=y/n, the policy domain is
the last record you found,  org domain is the last record unless it's psd=y in which case it's the level below.

I'll do a pull request so we can see if we agree on language.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email