IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 13 April 2023 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 E330DC1522AA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, 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=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="LViGJoE5"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="Be2yGBGQ"
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 gmf9t9-KHMFQ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:54:24 -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 1343DC14CF0C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 83847 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2023 18:54:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=14783.64384fdd.k2304; bh=U/J07+hIfXEwGP8l7ayQ9xMgjbpDqUoEJumclBl1JOA=; b=LViGJoE5lZ7Q/NGgBtJDVivNHlbG1It0rdVxnr6PBYwSK0nErTg0fnI8ye91JTfBr5ol0FN3kBde/Bz6h6UkViUdIROyazIfP6f+S54JdnQ8l2t2o5YPYw1sJEqtcYNQFcbZ4/o1O/QBdKoCkHuFNnA0+exqeGZB97MvDdReR2WPWr2286t9zeRY7FnReitAvswf85/l5Ni28gG5wrBieLp/0WrA9XMKhX6HB3IsRSyrilW6QtMsP6Bosx+vKJMMBs6e5IaAkrVC+czj3g005qsgeNeDDLEOUVO2MVTdZaJyBIALFSNiEFXIKOZ23AlfFZ7cre71faJYNWnNr7eAlw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=14783.64384fdd.k2304; bh=U/J07+hIfXEwGP8l7ayQ9xMgjbpDqUoEJumclBl1JOA=; b=Be2yGBGQQOma0nWdpMT3rohZoT+4mIbKCDvbA6knchV+2KuC+qz7hV65rkWudW01IIIgIsBvlHk0R72V//fR8u1/rbFoRyEONKx/kkJTe1h/i/b9/bk6qth5vFnspUNwRljFPzeOnfP7htEiRHiPl8wsMg3pbrKUtiYsH/yYXwRRokFhVCQH7+0ovwZd8iY7+XaspGD0ph1V/N52CZPUYjLi4N1ZISQzAozMOtelAansah95D1vPEELtAuIX87qWQAX491F3UnZd7lxBBhrmzs6jLiObyE2Bxt+rrsPps4kh0vUQth/ubK2+V9fC3o36PSY8OsY1XeDAO+ndde16WQ==
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; 13 Apr 2023 18:54:21 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 13972BF19614; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 14:54:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF55BF195F6; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 14:54:20 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 14:54:20 -0400
Message-ID: <830e7474-8f0a-fd58-c15b-dfd65df4015a@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Brotman, Alex" <Alex_Brotman@comcast.com>
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB435152C2C7561DC113D2D356F7989@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAL0qLwYbbLLq-qLg_Wnp5aFw_2my4UTZz3U3LjwbCmpMNdudfA@mail.gmail.com> <20230413151342.B96D0BF17F1F@ary.qy> <CALaySJKM5Kct0u0ekuEBS=DVQTXG_CiewpzNwVyPiAaQ9zx3VA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHej_8nyYrCXPo8aYOb+cVSf=2NQDOBmUgo-FD=ohPBZ=yFuHw@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJ+6JxGua90o8kgyoFH48swn6f0g8x+Jx4By4jQnC7ot8w@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYddHX20JOJfURAsVhpzi6HobX90qim=5Zw2jpbq5KsNJw@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJO=Cp4s+LY9R7dCbao5P9N82n_r1qG7v7iKYmRymSX0A@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB435152C2C7561DC113D2D356F7989@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/pu1fimClQ3nE8LqnA1Xuo2-oK8Q>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs
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, 13 Apr 2023 18:54:29 -0000

> I’ve talked about this before.  I ran into a utility company that I conversed with that explicitly didn’t want to use DKIM because they felt their messages should not be forwarded to another provider.  I didn’t quite understand the logic, but it was their decision.

I believe it, but needless to say, the fact that some people do dumb 
things don't make them any less dumb.

R's,
John

>
> I definitely favor some language that endorses using both and perhaps even outlines the pitfalls of using only one (can’t forward, both gives you a better chance of success, etc)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email