IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 17 July 2014 01:43 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 E62601A03F5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 WOMP7PHtqRkb for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DFB11A03F4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.111] (adsl-108-93-153-186.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net [108.93.153.186]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s6H1hAMU004601 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:43:13 -0700
Message-ID: <53C729C2.6060208@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:41:22 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mrex@sap.com
Subject: Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)
References: <20140717011528.9F6EC1ADAB@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
In-Reply-To: <20140717011528.9F6EC1ADAB@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vBmAI4FU0WrXPoJsAu7nxhtRr9k
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 01:43:16 -0000

On 7/16/2014 6:15 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
>> >    "Existing deployment of DMARC has demonstrated utility at internet
>> >     scale"
> I would propose to adjust this statement to better match reality.


DMARC is estimated to cover at least 60% of the world's mailboxes.

A number of major operator claim the DMARC has been quite helpful for
them.  (Yes, I've asked them to post some numbers.)


To the extent that you believe the current wording does not match
reality, please explain.  Please also proffer wording you consider better.


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email