IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC bis: ticket 63: make p=none with no reporting URI invalid?

Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com> Sun, 07 June 2020 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <seth@valimail.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 477EE3A0938 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jun 2020 13:42:07 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=valimail.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 G2POJynF3xEh for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jun 2020 13:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x436.google.com (mail-wr1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::436]) (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 5864D3A0935 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Jun 2020 13:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x436.google.com with SMTP id x6so15194867wrm.13 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 07 Jun 2020 13:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=valimail.com; s=google2048; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=XIYyAB6LwG/z4nBMZ+YcMm5IRqT+XYxCCF+uqK74JJw=; b=K+LXdrIw3w+TBpdeb7dGHfb8e4ssX1Ml0sNZOe2tsZYTzZxnKhxdLPEzeqvEaky2Hn Q7Tw8T8/S1e7yUZRflcTDvwp8V4TVDDSdyohgTkgQYUFv0pH3HCL1YD1LveL9at7Wlh5 OW3psXBK3QzmnK7Z+S0MolvoutH/OojZJG/Zfzfxow+8HtJl5nz3cV0B+YwV+kTJU/Cd p2gaWYEh/S9VXCVEBSJznG+bwnWZJl5QRJifMVK0Kev23PzDj/dkqLZ6I9MbfUWUWlGd /ntBewfBQ7nf5hBxcQB3LftvQwV5Em6AXkstSSA6jmtoyWEbLfPOXx6NViASnGks4Lx0 ijZQ==
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; bh=XIYyAB6LwG/z4nBMZ+YcMm5IRqT+XYxCCF+uqK74JJw=; b=nwqYDIqEVTu1yhzac1yQYC88GnMIIOf/a0YfJaocpYAkKJSesrA8jeJFM3qKGldO38 3QJM8cyMutQwXldFrqOW1R6cSdDhGEV2ZPyIoUqQgJ5CFq5YZdkK30Kg00Ry2R5muRj4 ZSV0I3Pb1+jaZ/p8PoqUgveoAr1ZRUnE1DUyFT/5e739GqW7sI4ON56LOByyYXL89yI0 4Og9d6uxyMnya/gP5FDJtZ9fSXLSkwnmVZwRLvtiqiNHmv1lC8nHPF/e0Qp41KlcEpDU 4U2ZZ1kYnoa5UJcYpAny4PlS5e0wFs/KxzRBX6MhyKHSm6TVjxmqbJrghNeW5WAujw4v HRHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ySI3tJgNnlZSaJjqU8CwQixzMVag7f+eHBWulyNMzBnDlhTpc klPtZ1X/YwHlI84EG5hUQyiPQ8TyPEeV69L+4izxU3bO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyd86/63kgLuGnyECkJtS41R2xt4HkSLVRzhXKnEWrxte2+mQVLD1rgsmf6eyWNbEPHYeIXm8WekiJJpbpO8/s=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:f507:: with SMTP id q7mr19800110wro.353.1591562520011; Sun, 07 Jun 2020 13:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOZAAfMg4Ss-UVn9fEQb8Jd-bNkxkbyFZQQfxPb8Rq0Nd+EjCg@mail.gmail.com> <b9e5da13-280e-1bf6-bdd4-185c10fbe396@tana.it> <CADyWQ+EZ2a9ArsYy5UOTjBoXSDcWniNkyzGR-8JUfmG6mFuLtg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYfUOow0=m_KQcdPU+YkG3b1DHq-9dmxe+yrvanH4PMfAA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XoYfUOow0=m_KQcdPU+YkG3b1DHq-9dmxe+yrvanH4PMfAA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Seth Blank <seth@valimail.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2020 13:41:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOZAAfP+5UDNDpUPi8Qcp93no4K=48GOzTkrsLbPbyzOWnSu+Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a4abfb05a7848635"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/w8riqN26SItwstv62jVKSHZjAJM>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC bis: ticket 63: make p=none with no reporting URI invalid?
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: Sun, 07 Jun 2020 20:42:07 -0000

As Chair, I'm closing ticket #63 and recording consensus of the group as
leaving this as-is, any guidance around this matter should be left to a BCP
or guidance document.

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 6:10 PM Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 5:57 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> (with no hats)
>>
>> p=none with no reporting is fine, and we should keep it.
>>
>> One thing the WG could do is a BCP document on operational recommendations
>> where there are certain suggestions like this.
>>
>> tim
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> Michael Hammer
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>


-- 

*Seth Blank* | VP, Standards and New Technologies
*e:* seth@valimail.com
*p:* 415.273.8818



This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email