----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Kitterman" <skl...@kitterman.com> > To: dmarc@ietf.org > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:41:39 PM > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] questions on the spec, was ... and two more tiny > nits, while I'm at it > > On Thursday, January 22, 2015 22:04:59 Franck Martin wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Scott Kitterman" <skl...@kitterman.com> > > > To: dmarc@ietf.org > > > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 7:16:58 PM > > > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] questions on the spec, was ... and two more > > > tiny > > > nits, while I'm at it> > > > On Friday, January 23, 2015 03:03:28 John Levine wrote: > > > > >RFC 7208 doesn't say the HELO result determines anything. It says IF > > > > >(I > > > > >say > > > > > > > > > >Avoiding a check that has been determined to be pointless is the only > > > > >change in this area in RFC 7208. > > > > > > > > Indeed, and that turns out to be a lot more incompatible than was > > > > appreciated at the time. > > > > > > I'm up to accepting that there's some ambiguity in the language, but I > > > don't see any actual incompatibility assuming the ambiguity is resolved > > > appropriately. > > > > > > If one changes "definitive policy result" to "definitive local policy > > > result" or > > > "definitive receiver policy result" then I think there's no ambiguity. > > > > > > I'm still a bit boggled that anyone is confused about this, but obviously > > > they > > > are. > > > > To try to explain the confusion... > > > > Well, DKIM is easy, DKIM is valid or is not (I'm excluding temp failures > > due > > to DNS etc..). The DKIM spec tells what the dkim result MUST be, and then > > the receiver do whatever with this result. > > > > With SPF, the spf=pass/fail result (as shown in the authentication-result > > header) is not depending on the sender policy as expressed in the SPF > > record, but at whatever the receiver policy is... > > No. An SPF result is the deterministic. It's a combination of domain, > identity, and result. This is always true and always consistent. > > Where the variation is in what the receiver decides to do. This is exactly > the same as DKIM. I think the confusion is that people think SPF does more > because of the name and because at one time (pre-RFC) it did. In hind sight, > we'd have been much better off to keep the original name: Sender Permitted > From.
I know the receiver can do whatever of the result, and anyhow the receiver, its rules. but I'm sorry I don't read anywhere in RFC7208 where f() is defined. spfresult in (pass,fail,softfail,permfail,tmpfail,none,...)=f(check_host(HELO identity, IP), check_host(MAIL FROM identity,IP)) it may be clear to you, but it is certainly not for me. Would you please define f()? (note calling MAIL FROM a combination of RFC5321.mailfrom and postmas...@rfc5321.helo does not help clarity either). _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
