IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Google.com hops on the DMARC bandwagon

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 30 April 2014 02:32 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C8D1A09EE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.843
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, J_CHICKENPOX_110=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
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 X8wi-8YqwQ6S for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 043D51A09E9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 37109 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2014 02:32:47 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 30 Apr 2014 02:32:47 -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; s=ae1.536060ce.k1404; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=xitoS/L2uPuCt4op008IZvLw71/9S+Nh1+Ez9cWio9Y=; b=XoDXpkTN5uT3hW2SxoKkSiLA+sa3TBkB5Ch3ztwWPsuxfVF+sJ4J4WjHRwFKA/+A3Pzvu79JGrxLvCzi6W5T7XcJ4ATUarfhKgZ9bu1MhM18Q3Qbn0wQ16msq7nlDBioOkW5sZjWdL3j1itBNTYv+LdXnUjy7uvmfl3ScLOW2SAKAADq2eYbFNSmDXUWP2jYub3TUEL9F2qvQWrpfToGS168uPhZQAuaGC/ml9etf4hSbi78SeTqbKVmt5zXwtaP
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; s=ae1.536060ce.k1404; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=xitoS/L2uPuCt4op008IZvLw71/9S+Nh1+Ez9cWio9Y=; b=pGzfp5D9aIfO2EKt0lAN90csfLSZp381Li0gBVLM5C9XYuMHC7CVrumAjHYznzItMzw9uJNop3WbbaORdz73+dd/6xUuqJj9zX+olE+yefBGor6DjDiy1MNXNgK9ubOqnjw7LBpLE8lEHYvhQj85yAapVFVJ2dGX31DAEYi95Y1h2a4lfouWHk6Sw6iAkPS8KVwioi6LLatT8iAIg4rEEyoNHWkOwHSzcEh/FpFdr4wcEhc560NeYnGIKbSVba3/
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 02:32:24 -0000
Message-ID: <20140430023224.2784.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Google.com hops on the DMARC bandwagon
In-Reply-To: <01P782BTLB96000054@mauve.mrochek.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/httatFWhVDmGvssn31uqWR1y7zU
Cc: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 02:32:51 -0000

>> But in this case, we're talking about the p=quarantine policy that
>> Google published for google.com... No bouncing (and hence no automatic
>> unsubscription, unless a receiver interprets p=quarantine as 'please
>> reject').
>
>Fair point. My observation about the appropriate acronym stands, however.

Actually, mail with google.com From: addresses is bouncing.  I see
bounces from mxlogic among others.  No, I don't know why they're
treating p=quarantine as though it were p=reject, but they are.

The acronym is more appropriate than ever.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email