Re: [dmarc-ietf] Some Proposed Language for a New pct Tag Defintion

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 31 July 2021 20:38 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 8F37C3A1A6D for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 13:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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=gxddiDY2; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=iJRO+cig
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 v2skyktyZinO for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 13:38:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21A623A1A6B for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 13:38:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 26687 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2021 20:38:45 -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=683d.6105b4d5.k2107; bh=0Q83lWSymbIuPYLfvfErw0Sqn/fjbP7q88X8zzVvXEw=; b=gxddiDY2w+BRKQZ0XDkJOC/JxTWzuMVsAtQbrig4/muL1JwLA5ZEYtCPAa+VSMhFlQinO77hi/9YvJlY2rV7VF/f68Sh0fn61ivpSr4lfXqynmOfKAzobdjEfYsZmB3YBl1+1ZPwBG/JDxLugzJaTp2UrLp8cYdgnhaCeRnvkA8p5nBq6HSR2JT7NezquBkGD0pd4/U/kI+XaBb2iU9qQzJiTBzHLuc/VVVlXx/ieJTIhsNWX3szf9jSTp8j2FaL6nQhX0pMVjE7Wf9drn2k8tEE+Pszw92u4jtG9IPSvnFiBiMYon1Y4cPU47gPPi2EeFaxfRaUancYEbJPrLITIg==
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=683d.6105b4d5.k2107; bh=0Q83lWSymbIuPYLfvfErw0Sqn/fjbP7q88X8zzVvXEw=; b=iJRO+cigs6qDOu6V1lMrnEPPG3UI0Vs+6ILI3RQsIxIZssyxXOigXafrUgw4X/fZd6Uw807S+jW9XgLzxRYof9BVKBd5RHDp97fuakdaKaGmn6uHHIFJaU/jlRygIPwwStUXNr/UVv30V3yD1uyqBl5Zw6ZBw89vIhAzztFoVrmQrQ33arxrfJ8OzQkKSmvlJKfKXT9sqhaCxZa9vFvmUONREY0g8T2nM9sVLkPFQxKMI6QYBWT/My8A9nkBKl3lHge1JKylXSGFg0s+IZBoIOePAzBOP184KLKnuATCSGUP3EhBhEJKTjF6V+Zlt3cdJinUnCPdFokuXicrYyTyQQ==
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 (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 31 Jul 2021 20:38:44 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 1DBB42566507; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 16:38:41 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 31 Jul 2021 16:38:41 -0400
Message-Id: <20210731203844.1DBB42566507@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: todd.herr@valimail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAHej_8m4W_k_r9SV6reNJA7aMGFCkK451tjvQGtrPNwRtJwC8A@mail.gmail.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/shBDb5ZH1R14FvEigS8cNtmkcq8>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Some Proposed Language for a New pct Tag Defintion
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: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 20:38:51 -0000

I'd make it a lot simpler:

   pct:  (plain-text integer; OPTIONAL; default is 100).  For the
      RFC5322.From domain to which the DMARC record applies, the "pct"
      tag describes what receivers are requested to to do with unaligned messages.
      This parameter does not affect the generation of DMARC reports.  Possible values are as follows:

      0:  A request to not apply the policy, but for message forwarders
          to do whatever message rewriting they do that is intended to avoid
          sending DMARC unaligned mail.

      100:  The default, a request to apply the policy as specified.

      Any other value: results are undefined.

It makes no sense to say anything about how DMARC reports are received, they're received however they 
are.  If there were some way to give them a free pass, whaddaya know, spam would start looking
like DMARC reports.

The way this is written, p=none pct=0 requests rewriting, which I don't think is wrong.  It doesn't mean
anything else now.

R's,
John