Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft dkim-transforms

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <> Mon, 07 December 2020 04:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C58D3A0FE8 for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2020 20:50:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SAtkICbMIF2p for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2020 20:50:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::932]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 108223A00D3 for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2020 20:50:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id g3so4081153uae.7 for <>; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 20:50:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jWOAbO70fVDSK5fU0oT09p9+17jkG+thjJ16JuSeaCs=; b=SySzq5qkyA1pOdYs8eNjmvQWBDEB68oSqdhrIPO59yERHX1QJhkEPCdw8p/R64uhWq rZgdEXErN6qA45lZMsYamSB5KIruxbbojOIAB1aHcCR/hrLcPPXFg3fYdq9C807RXGFf lj3MiED2/NKaW0xFg2If3mGUcxrw+rGISvIjSkZjJW7EHzpbsbNT6Lrb5frq+HoMGDeU 5zCnXNCcshR1QZwZwo7Px2BEgOK20OwH+ZL/BbuV8nh7YtoL5aO8/05l68EUco2sp4dj /XvdL0JKVDJsZlykQTUl01/YeZy2nmLp1yJ0YUMJ3XVO0cAnY0kOim41b+NWH6mo4k5D 4jHQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jWOAbO70fVDSK5fU0oT09p9+17jkG+thjJ16JuSeaCs=; b=Gmnr75iRzu/GrdqqvurT7JsP59Aa1Rw7LagMYUhUapfzolyG3sCcL2z/9M7jcrgw+w ze73ho64O9TC/QtIiZ3uyckAYQVM/3ziem3YGbSOU1gS32Ya4x8xOk3V6X9a4vpiauuK 7AApv2IwcTjIixxGPsBou62TCnjKgb83wWIX5RXu4efGrRHivXMi4yLhEGYxbFFUd59/ NX0j0kp68UM6Ll65dWVyf1VDKZT4+ZO4UQzyLm4U8GJB5/51+TI8XHyzRz/N/t424h6e 7ua4kfdifL3WGnZoPNMsDPgWiVYQYW4Ig4sRR+21DYFb/rE6rTauU2ft8h/4r9Oz5f3P hRgA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531mqZ1nvNFrwbPJRZIpMc6zWsfiSVQjfCgAt4wD3pZrRbEjQPjS wrlOh+X9Ul6nb0U6+NC2hxqSlN8N8kyHU0OyINue1N4R
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRMY+ieclwO2LL1gNIbtRsdTa1sH5hG+/dtUcDde1Te9uauhHwUOURwCvez4WAMAyQdQYDgY8TTfErqVaweXs=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:4881:: with SMTP id x1mr10908901uac.101.1607316646003; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 20:50:46 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 20:50:32 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: Michael Thomas <>
Cc: "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ba086605b5d891c9"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft dkim-transforms
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 04:50:48 -0000

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 12:21 PM Michael Thomas <> wrote:

> I scanned through Murray's draft and wonder if it's been implemented? Or
> whether we could in some way simulate what percentage of traffic it
> would work for? It mostly mirrors a lot of the things I did way back
> when, but it does go farther with some of the MIME stuff. The advantage
> I had with my heuristics and z= stuff is that it doesn't require
> cooperation with the mailing list software, so I could actually run
> numbers to see how well it was working.
> As I said earlier, I think the basic question is what constitutes success.

Most of the time the discussion resulting from the draft has resulted in
lukewarm interest at best, so I never implemented it (or I did, but never
released it, and that was a while ago).