Re: Realistic responses to DMARC

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 18 December 2016 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F1C129560 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 23:24:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=C3eHH+6q; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=NsPbW/Qq
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 I8-p3RB4KnAi for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 23:24:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A409129455 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 23:24:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 25538 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2016 07:24:09 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=63c1.58563999.k1612; bh=S5Z432tNho1KuEHSL+DbJCRFguvBRHDHJEEmpDRvDLY=; b=C3eHH+6q9UhsG8K+MkHuxgJpovI9La+YfpJF5a+WFYnk9G0myNZJ0UqHfzKz2ue9djLG7OvW/WuncB81R+am7gn9lRGIFK4nZfOkpj9Sjz0RBzmRea+Q5oBNjJj0S8mci9e15wWGyYpeVoXQczfYiQR79C1q+W6KUb0I91EOIIHw/IkpYyEz2/ImjJ97cqn/6kx4ADpdca4NoYhX88KdaHZ4BPDzVyOSS3zYQ2BmAe0KUDuZPF6KBUaNLXQ7JY1d
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=63c1.58563999.k1612; bh=S5Z432tNho1KuEHSL+DbJCRFguvBRHDHJEEmpDRvDLY=; b=NsPbW/QqmFwK0+K5QmqyACbJZYlUf+jgsHwgV9mnloklP+faJZ9p4C014E5DKfxUpA9D33LiuVOEGhP1Qu2Khpt0Fmb1jrgLkPpqeQx85O4GXMyypZ0aEPD63ky9Lom76bzYijjlQ0edCHJ/pgbZ6lrXnzTkWzuE2NxFD2IIc/QRHERR/DPBuSpVIlqnY4HXP8JKGoOdBwJumO1A0BuMPuyaNUgh9He7uh0xqd71IgsYsPFt1wYbB2Ta2nIf5pFr
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 18 Dec 2016 07:24:09 -0000
Date: 18 Dec 2016 02:24:03 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1612180215450.14970@ary.qy>
From: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Realistic responses to DMARC
In-Reply-To: <20161218065905.5g66jgkvtckydmry@thunk.org>
References: <9AD6AAD6812D3B9F8379226B@PSB> <20161218022823.8779.qmail@ary.lan> <20161218055834.he6gkupqp5xqlvml@thunk.org> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1612180101460.14297@ary.qy> <20161218065905.5g66jgkvtckydmry@thunk.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (OSX 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KGmG_0TbA03D29VDegLBNRxeqkw>
Cc: IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 07:24:06 -0000

> Therefore, a developer-friendly mail service MUST NOT have a p=reject
> or p=quarantee DMARC policy, and MUST also ignore DMARC policies on
> the receiving end.  Fortunately, these mail services do exist, even if
> they aren't the big, free consumer ones.

Linux may be enough of a cult that developers will put up with having to 
use a mail account different from the one they use for everything else, 
but as I've said a couple of times already, I don't think the IETF can 
stand the blood loss.

There are some workarounds, maybe ARC, maybe message wrapping, maybe some 
kind of From: munging.  We're looking at them and scratching our heads.

R's,
John