IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 18 August 2020 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 E6D543A091D for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=EdalXV4h; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=DFyx3xtg
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 2K89KgZH5l-t for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C82E3A098B for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 27650 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2020 18:04:30 -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=6bff.5f3c182e.k2008; bh=pZjFA+HDsEaoSQ6v9GoXe8gntiYRCG7IMIDBMQ4BFh0=; b=EdalXV4hiHOJrNbXpYZD7dqqP828v3oYT8vSGvs3t/2OKaHyjSHDbCMJhvrZkwElPYb1bTJ1c01srS891a0vtZomEN/HTtA83/K1A4iJWtf9xJVYVcj8oH/3Qjx2Y3LmRqmSnWoCQEUtOOSt862joOdkv3fts4lbybGUsMaPDK2vwbVte1dR93yIGvubkYHyjEI4duSLFjPYIRSOIPo17RM2IPun6QcTcIXAzj1V4FUDKh2d2Y3jqGxDgEFEo+Xa4eG4yiWtSJaIhLctmdJlrRu7uzS4hIGNMEEovkoUTTcJM2b1QAxSB9f882QU3nzJlQ5WbjlCMcMirRo72bZkzA==
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=6bff.5f3c182e.k2008; bh=pZjFA+HDsEaoSQ6v9GoXe8gntiYRCG7IMIDBMQ4BFh0=; b=DFyx3xtg1bwMwaHaFMBzm3xAlDM2ViLHJVozpmC8pNyFuCDRsycKOnYPvPcUBcw0AkRJBWTZ6qkBPcRSVnxrjznxk7Y2SPk3EEtyWh9ndjPiXvJx5QP5fhXJRU0mJIiOFfRwIzMwOycWry6ujWj1cVOwfXOTioCUVDrbtVpBtUpbTUdERM0cPemfkHk6G61gCto7I77OiDRvmG57vE06W5gB5b2XXm2kG0liC8X3O5tLmhUyxofgwwS9AHx/RbKD4Sk8+CHVJWlypoWQo1qm3GLhgH1zR8AapRxa7+/lU+CbW/J5NIitxH9aYdLlAZt8JkEgskK8j5Ng7BSB5KBnAQ==
Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 18 Aug 2020 18:04:29 -0000
Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4612C1EEA9B6; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 14:04:29 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 14:04:29 -0400
Message-Id: <20200818180429.4612C1EEA9B6@ary.local>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: tools-discuss@ietf.org
Cc: cabo@tzi.org
In-Reply-To: <C67DF50D-6680-4000-A229-6C17A03A254C@tzi.org>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/GaqF4r_q5B3Fwdx_2dS-Qvok-y8>
Subject: Re: [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 18:04:36 -0000

In article <C67DF50D-6680-4000-A229-6C17A03A254C@tzi.org> you write:
>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.

No, you just have a typical SPF misconfiguration.

When you send a message to a dmarc.ietf.org address, it is forwarded
to the underlying foo@bar.com address. This sort of forwarding is very
common.

You publish an SPF record that ends with -all, which means that you
don't want people to forward your mail.  You need to make up your mind.

I can tell you from long experience that other than the trivial case
of -all for a domain that sends no mail at all, -all in an SPF record causes
more problems than it solves.  If you want your mail to be delivered, use ~all.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email