Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [arc-discuss] openarc defer messages

From: Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 09:20:01 +0200

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Juri Haberland via arc-discuss <
[email-masked]> wrote:

>
> I've seen now a couple of emails from Hotmail/Outlook.com being deferred by
> OpenArc. Looks like Microsoft is experimenting with A-R headers, but they
> get it wrong.
>
[elided]

> But OpenArc defers mail with a valid empty A-R header, too:
> > Authentication-Results: batleth.sapienti-sat.org; none
>
> I'll open a ticket about it on GitHub.
>

It seems like there is another problem here if OpenARC is trying to take a
"foreign" A-R header and suck it into being "your" AAR header. The only
auth results that should ever be trusted is the one you create (per
RFC7601).

--Kurt

---

From: Juri Haberland <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:27:10 +0200

> auth results that should ever be trusted is the one you create (per

OpenARC parses all A-R headers and reads them into a structure - one by
one. After an A-R header is parsed, the AuthServID is compared and if it
matches, the parsed A-R header is further used - else it is ignored.

So no problem here.

  Juri

---

From: Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:33:41 +0200

> matches, the parsed A-R header is further used - else it is ignored.

But if the parsing fails, then it was hanging and causing message deferral,
even if the AuthServID would have disqualified that header from being used
further?

--Kurt

---

From: Juri Haberland <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 11:28:18 +0200

> even if the AuthServID would have disqualified that header from being used

It was not hanging, it returned a temp failure to the MTA on purpose (in
all cases where OpenARC cannot parse an A-R header) - which is debatable...
I have created a pull request to just skip such headers, see
https://github.com/mskucherawy/OpenARC/pull/42

  Juri

---

From: Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 11:43:40 +0200

> https://github.com/mskucherawy/OpenARC/pull/42

Yes, I saw your PR but had not looked at the details - thanks very much!

--Kurt

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 09:23:48 -0700

> Yes, I saw your PR but had not looked at the details - thanks very much!

I don't think OpenARC development details are appropriate for the IETF
list, are they?

-MSK

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 09:53:35 +0200

> I don't think OpenARC development details are appropriate for the IETF list,
> are they?

For extended discussion, perhaps not, but it speaks to running code.
If discussion of implementations can lead to a better understanding of
the spec, or fixes to the spec, or whatever, tant mieux.

Barry

---

From: Hector Santos <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 17:12:18 -0400

> I don't think OpenARC development details are appropriate for the IETF

I agree.

-- 
HLS