Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-03.txt

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 01 September 2021 20:29 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 576A63A191F for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, 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=srPIFX2p; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=ScIo+BkU
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 S5N-nsV21QdK for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:28:53 -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 849F33A191C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 80986 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2021 20:28:49 -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=13c58.612fe281.k2109; bh=Xm0hj9JSjm77+Mz1GnjkyGqx+cx4W0JlId5Y5tIfXHY=; b=srPIFX2ptcubNDwRH+m20Twz5inpNt3kIvO2T4wEuvDUxeoPDYN7pxnivQDZA/Ov/Wrh9DH6hUbXZk2v516D3Y9bdWgvtVtwKnn1IGTJcp7EqDkVhNXE6yi+1hnrNk/DOZwfEBdOUgzvxC0I94Li6PSu9hDWnx5v9piNY3vU/cH90vqXO+bkJid3ZxUFe4kmuHP1dd2R+DkOoqkwjdsxSpIZPbLg/2v2kr6dyGUY6OeZEAx5dhtzFzQc54tJBiFuB93eYQd8P6FCVQkn7PryX7NFHSqEZNRV6OC6Cb/wRZmQef4kK6f9Fco+addEhH36w51uKM5XZiwth9PKLCaM1Q==
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=13c58.612fe281.k2109; bh=Xm0hj9JSjm77+Mz1GnjkyGqx+cx4W0JlId5Y5tIfXHY=; b=ScIo+BkUYhjgmMof0IEkKg5Zricxp9N/TvLNHm8+gAH4Lrd5pJUv0DgOnEZMIopFAQdHNAE28KNmLPJvJ36dptjh49G5Qliv4X6zRlUjid4gvy7cgcQT+2Rhh9Hxh8Lu1+u06fUsDyGQQuqsbBaI7SYlyCUlz7+9cozfNNi2JtygF4CyoTpi5A5c5adACMVUUqiWBw5YoG7m5WYz8e7mXd07hdIgvpwX95TDDHklbQKqUjYQeHqLYQzvjLq7/2p1V7xLFPqBGDbTMlsfsKCWd8Opv2DIDxj7yalhyO6Vv+d+BhJGHu0RxjgZRtV3tT97aU9PNc/krsmwKwAYTLOvFQ==
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; 01 Sep 2021 20:28:49 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 87E1A27478C6; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:28:46 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 1 Sep 2021 16:28:46 -0400
Message-Id: <20210901202848.87E1A27478C6@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: Alex_Brotman@comcast.com
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB435159F91A6B1724449AD91FF7CD9@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.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/tmlllW_EmJ_GodLkhj4BFsXK0MI>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-03.txt
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: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 20:29:01 -0000

It appears that Brotman, Alex <Alex_Brotman@comcast.com> said:
>It feels like folks would prefer that the subject be required to be of a specific format to better enable duplicate report processing.  Do I
>understand that correctly?
>
>So that would be:
>
>     If a report generator needs to re-send a report, the system
>     MUST use the same filename as the original report.
>
>And:
>
>     The RFC5322.Subject field for individual report submissions
>     MUST conform to the following ABNF:

Sounds right.

>And we need to add some language suggesting how to deal with duplicates report transmission, if they happen.  Scott/Matt also pointed toward a
>few other areas that could use with a bit of clarification.

I don't see what the problem is with receiving duplicates.  Maybe you ignore them,
maybe you process them and replace the original result.  Either is OK.  Even if
you store the results twice, it's hard to see how that will make much difference
to your overall report analysis.

R's,
John