[dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Fri, 04 December 2020 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@fresheez.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 497103A0C87 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:41:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mtcc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 JOnuD1XvX9DZ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:41:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (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 57CC63A0C83 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:41:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id n10so4328610pgv.8 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 13:41:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mtcc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=7jb6iAZ3JPPx70WuDnOHJ0+rQlNlOOAhSI71LoLwp+k=; b=rgT4iD9HVZni2RcIncDs9vUSEJoX9Yv2zsqgimjzcKn9JCvMcoYnQ/GctiXyAC95kK b3673HqnUfmrwFHS8a6fCknK2jsySiX7traXEVLpOaLb/MlAlrDQqJxtWL9PLTbieyBX /Vgr3lFm22JEW1ml8c+L3gq8oscnvScbeg4Lr9BXKBRVvsiQi4QwMhJ02IRFV2nIS+aV VMRlgBNyavDqGcPksVyJLOqEqik/FyRxlxYpeK4HEn/P/a8Fam46GIVIhhYRYi9P7tWT yQsouPWVYbLzCCNRn9vFMd1Y57gjwGtf+rQqZAx92Ub6JWmvg2M46c/pU0WfFXqKtu+B BtRQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=7jb6iAZ3JPPx70WuDnOHJ0+rQlNlOOAhSI71LoLwp+k=; b=BSlCfPjhmp7tTNtrK71GhL4dNhbclCOw530whrCIx5nAh2ktjuUZ5AWjYQYwhDHf91 XhyLqzw1XxwDfrnB4UbsxAt2et6urRXtTPKsE4JX41vOOoKmUn7kUU7zgO6tg19guBJf 5+BP4MoW7IrHrwZldP3+d2AR/1ZL0yjQQvxJWFBdplkVhkepKFnuO/i5Q/qxo1w1SAE1 +rjS1KJZ7Wb9kXGepOuwsujKitqQhMjB+RtJTiCqMOLOVzY5FM5NJ6RECYJhLJsVEMNG 1hNzZrKJwOerxsnmTGVYVLfNS7X+iwcIYxJgGw2dG9e33ZQINd+Jx/2ITtip84qduJen j0Lw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530DEWeSRSrbhvxOzvMNj9MY0ysFYnLcxtd8lPHWaeIoq5g20a45 IMHMjvTu1OL0IRWCSfiQp2JBCWS8YAFGPw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzA60MleC2UyUXfVAQ/1NterlZf+1X/xyE3B7uAPjgDv+Vr8k89lK1s0DtamYqO9l5gqJOoog==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:843a:0:b029:19d:b279:73c9 with SMTP id q26-20020aa7843a0000b029019db27973c9mr5623706pfn.3.1607118091063; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 13:41:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-42-33.volcanocom.com. [107.182.42.33]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id mr7sm2991895pjb.31.2020.12.04.13.41.29 for <dmarc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Dec 2020 13:41:30 -0800 (PST)
To: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <134860ee-5fbf-2fb3-a5b3-4be68806ab22@mtcc.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:41:28 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/zMhFuxAsG0qArxrC-rDd0VZ4iBE>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?
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: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 21:41:33 -0000

Is my google fu completely failing me, or is RFC 7489 not the DMARC 
protocol spec?

If it's informational, how did that happen?

Mike