John Levine skrev den 2024-03-22 03:52:
According to Mark Alley <mark.al...@tekmarc.com>:
I don't feel particularly strongly about this, but I can see people
thinking there's some correlation between DKIM testing and DMARC
testing. It's not completely illogical, so it might be better to be
explicit.
Scott K
Agreed as well. It's worth calling out, IMO.
I disagree. DMARC is a decade old and I am not aware that anyone,
ever, has had problems due
to confusion about DMARC and DKIM test flags. This document is already
too long and too late.
Unless there is an actual problem to solve here, let's close the issue
and finish up.
why is dkim fail here
X-Spam-Status No, score=-1.321 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[AUTHRES_DKIM_FAIL=0.5, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.372, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-2,
RCVD_IN_ANONMAILS=1.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=1.3, SPF_PASS=-0.1]
autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results mx.junc.eu (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit
key) header.d=ietf.org header.b="Xr+FwPZI"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
header.d=ietf.org header.b="Xr+FwPZI"; dkim=fail (2048-bit key)
reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=iecc.com
header.b="qTXLFk6y"; dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has
been altered)" header.d=taugh.com header.b="IB1/7fRP"
Authentication-Results ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit
key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=iecc.com
header.b="qTXLFk6y"; dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has
been altered)" header.d=taugh.com header.b="IB1/7fRP"
its already dkim fail at delivery to amsl ?
let me see if eitf still breaks my dkim :=)
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
