Re: Enough DMARC whinging
"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 06 May 2014 05:59 UTC
Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.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 00A471A0253 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 May 2014 22:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 CvV4e1YYQkRW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 May 2014 22:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22c.google.com (mail-wg0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2201A0246 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2014 22:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id a1so5922383wgh.15 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 May 2014 22:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=t/DxE80fL70UsHdcQJQY9wpFp93HYiDv8CLB+mnq0Ec=; b=OrSdo+dK059T1v5ebuaiFEy5PiL0HOeCc0DiqhBehNmiMA4iAJEv61ahjVBG8ueYZB xGjeink0MDL54HmQM3Ti/JJVZzSd8IrTrv7kJTEhtk/GKG5I9jLIxS3WFNpHxSh22MoF 3Zlfy9nOPnSZdyuAsbAMSBprwEoKmdFiqg9ow1P8Zc5wiur7BWUyadIKwGIhAyE//E+O mBkbmvBCDizo/Oj1yJ4+yf5Ty1tREeQlHDmj6AkcIwtv1J5ksIuP7iS1elcfg26WkbDg aXgs9MEo4LVHJya+QwzYFGRFKAESKQcOJLFimOhyzysM1fby0nvtP/rxXBiLroo5gDW7 94Lw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.220.42 with SMTP id pt10mr477088wjc.60.1399355986011; Mon, 05 May 2014 22:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.210.194 with HTTP; Mon, 5 May 2014 22:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzy=EFEiAR+hQt8WKE9YtpDhk7QgoLQXTKQZYzhWuW6+HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwh0Sc2wtvjEAjOMi4emDzyF4JWmmzYr5QEFcmyoKtkTAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwikJhO5R6UqWx8qUswMptgTw_wF6E6_9Ok=SRYTBChYgA@mail.gmail.com> <536113B1.5070309@bbiw.net> <CAMm+LwiXoW3p5uCmML4kAWXnbrrAnSCK9x5U2qeHJdVgR2r_Gg@mail.gmail.com> <E3A7C677B18263C8DF6DD316@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <5362943D.2020907@bluepopcorn.net> <536295E5.3080502@dcrocker.net> <5362B4C6.10904@meetinghouse.net> <CAL0qLwb_UJrjViZwxrSC=y4y8geY8-N0QOHMeBski3dEuBqB6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwYPzfjPA6qBN=SXaJFvtYZcumRnZ5tCSNHbdw1r_hyG-w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKHUCzy=EFEiAR+hQt8WKE9YtpDhk7QgoLQXTKQZYzhWuW6+HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 22:59:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwbsL3qgFqyzroswRz=1HK2UjxkBtUEP9+_yLqxEiLGvjw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Enough DMARC whinging
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c1b68075ea5d04f8b4f4eb"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nNucCsKGOylu2UogChqwl89ZzH4
Cc: IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 06 May 2014 05:59:52 -0000
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote: > > The SMTP state machine is not changed by DMARC any more than SPF or others >> changed it. It doesn't add any new states, verbs, parameters, or anything >> else. DMARC sits at least two "layers" above where SMTP operates. As with >> any number of other filtering systems, it can influence SMTP's final DATA >> reply, but that's hardly unique or even unusual. >> > > It aims to change the behaviour of Internet Mail as deployed. > So did sendmail rewrite rules, SPF, spamassassin, or anything else you can recall that established new acceptance requirements of some kind. This is hardly a new concept. Whether you want to claim that this is formally extending SMTP, per-se, or > not is really something of a moot point - there is certainly an > intentional, large, effect on the deployed protocol. Arguing whether this > fits the letter of some particular definition smacks of lawyering to my > mind. > I never said that it has no impact, or even a small impact. (I would also point out that amid all this angry mudslinging, it's been pointed out several times that DMARC has been in use by some operators for more than a year, and for them it works fine and has had no visible negative impact.) What I am saying is that it does not achieve its impact using the mechanism claimed up-thread, namely some kind of extension to SMTP or DNS. Speaking derisively about precision of expression in a standards community seems pretty strange to me. -MSK
- Enough DMARC whinging Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Christian de Larrinaga
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Mitch Rodrigues
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging John C Klensin
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging John Levine
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Jim Fenton
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Hector Santos
- Commenting on/ reviewing Independent Submissions … John C Klensin
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Mark Andrews
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Hector Santos
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Doug Barton
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Alessandro Vesely
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging t.p.
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Not Enough DMARC whinging John Levine
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Jim Fenton
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Miles Fidelman
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Cridland
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Crocker
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Dave Cridland
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: Enough DMARC whinging Murray S. Kucherawy
- Large market player S Moonesamy
- Re: Large market player Abdussalam Baryun