Re: [Shutup] chained authorizationm, was Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers ...

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 30 November 2015 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: shutup@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: shutup@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E541ACEA2 for <shutup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 08:21:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.862
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.862 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 dnOFP0Kqiu3c for <shutup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 08:21:48 -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-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F32211ACEA7 for <shutup@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 08:21:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 47981 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2015 16:21:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2015 16:21:46 -0000
Date: 30 Nov 2015 16:21:24 -0000
Message-ID: <20151130162124.13748.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org, shutup@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <glJrvFDUtDXWFA87@highwayman.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/shutup/aQLlCQ5NHBKO5rZ_l_VW8WdM0D8>
Cc: richard@highwayman.com
Subject: Re: [Shutup] chained authorizationm, was Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers ...
X-BeenThere: shutup@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy <shutup.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/shutup>, <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/shutup/>
List-Post: <mailto:shutup@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shutup>, <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 16:21:53 -0000

>If you're relaying the email on to somewhere else then you're assuming
>that there's a mechanism by which your policy regarding SPF becomes
>known to those other people.
>
>I'm unaware of such a mechanism existing at the moment --

That's more or less what Authentication-Results and the deprecated
Received-SPF headers do, recording a snapshot of what the SPF results
were at the time a message was relayed. The ARC proposal in
draft-andersen-arc-00 adds a signed chain of A-R trace headers.

But again, SPF and A-R and ARC don't do the same thing as Received, which
is why we have different headers for them.

R's,
John