IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Tools-discuss] DMARC workaround breaks SPF on replies?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Tue, 18 August 2020 05:55 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91D103A1797 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 XUFR-SMFlztt for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E91453A1791 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.42.100] (p5089ae91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.174.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BW0WY5b27z109p; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 07:55:37 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 619422937.3712291-9b6f858a544d95bc92ffafe69a81ea72
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 07:55:37 +0200
Message-Id: <C67DF50D-6680-4000-A229-6C17A03A254C@tzi.org>
To: Tools Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/3hm6XvUw-0-aEVpvy0gTl_DKAZg>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] DMARC workaround breaks SPF on replies?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 05:55:44 -0000

I just got a delivery failure on a reply I sent to a DMARC-encoded address (foo=40bar.com@dmarc.ietf.org).  So that path also needs DMARC-encoding of the sender?  Sheesh.

(There is an outstanding ticket on DMARC/SPF-encoding senders for the alias exploders, but having to do this on the return path as well was news to me.)

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email