Re: [Tools-discuss] Can't send mail to Cenk (Fwd: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender)

Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Fri, 11 December 2020 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <henrik@levkowetz.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 81F1D3A0DEF for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:12:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-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 SV6ZXCuMO0Le for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:12:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [64.170.98.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D72C43A0D2B for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:12:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h-202-242.a357.priv.bahnhof.se ([158.174.202.242]:62153 helo=tannat.local) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1knnq0-0001Y1-Po; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:12:21 -0800
To: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>, tools-discuss@ietf.org, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
References: <20201211183328.C2BDF2979A3F@ary.qy> <461.1607713827@localhost>
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
Message-ID: <50c0527d-4676-d485-382e-c967035798ea@levkowetz.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 20:12:12 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <461.1607713827@localhost>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dap4lE2QWDSn6bRPkJUXjnJ1JFC2MlXE2"
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 158.174.202.242
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: johnl@taugh.com, tools-discuss@ietf.org, mcr@sandelman.ca
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/xNPnc4apdgOkTdsxGm_fi5tPR3Y>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Can't send mail to Cenk (Fwd: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender)
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: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 19:12:24 -0000


On 2020-12-11 20:10, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>     > In article <93628091-1A48-4865-A100-F64DE5981ECF@tzi.org> you write:
>     >> -=-=-=-=-=-
>     >>
>     >> This went to mail=2Bietf=40gundogan.net@dmarc.ietf.org, and I thought
>     >> that was all that is needed to get mail out.
> 
>     >>> to: SPF fail - not authorized. Please see
>     >>> http://www.openspf.net/Why?s=mfrom;id=cabo@tzi.org;ip=4.31.198.44;r=<UNKNOWN>
> 
>     > Your message was relayed through the IETF's mail server and your SPF
>     > -all tells him to reject relayed mail.  His mail system is doing
>     > exactly what you've asked it to do.
> 
>     > If you believe that the IETF should do something else to forwarded mail
>     > it would be helpful if you could point to relevant RFCs. Or, of course,
>     > you could fix your SPF record.
> 
> Well, I believe that the IETF should stop with the dmarc.ietf.org, and
> we should simply do, as you said, what the sender's SPF and DMARC records
> say, and simply drop their email rather than allow it through mailman.
> 
> They didn't want it relayed, we shouldn't relay it. Period.
> 
> If we are going to do this rewriting, then we had better get it right, and
> that means rewriting it both ways.

We are rewriting it both ways.  This was not a bug in our setup.

	Henrik


> {I'm been told that ARC solves all of this, but that was like 8 years ago,
> and we still don't have much.  I guess we have a document, but I haven't seen
> it deployed yet.  Is it?}
> 
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
> 
> 
> 
> ___________________________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list
> Tools-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
> 
> Please report datatracker.ietf.org and mailarchive.ietf.org
> bugs at http://tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb
> or send email to datatracker-project@ietf.org
> 
> Please report tools.ietf.org bugs at
> http://tools.ietf.org/tools/issues
> or send email to webmaster@tools.ietf.org
>