You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am implementing DMARC, and I have some troubles follows:
Our system provides selectable intervals between 1 to 48 hours reagrdless of ri.
so the interval(The difference between start and end) can be 3,600 to 172,800 and in reports, date_range is like this:
Is it correct date_range? and the contents should be included that range, not [end-86400]?
for example, if ri=3600, the contents should be included 1650243662(2022-04-18 10:01:02) and 1650247262(2022-04-18 11:01:02),
not 1650160862(2022-04-17 11:01:02) and 1650247262(2022-04-18 11:01:02)?
if the period is 1 hour, should the content of report is between now and 1 hour ago? or between now and 1 day ago?
In the other words, if the period is 36 hours, should the content of report is between now and 36 hours ago? or between now and 1 day ago?
In our report, the content seems it doesn't matter about period. 1 day fixed.
Our system generates dkim_status with dkim_result_code.
here is the code which get dkim status.
static int __get_dkim_status(int dkim_result_code) {
switch(dkim_result_code) {
case 0: // None
return DMARC_POLICY_DKIM_OUTCOME_NONE;
case 1: // Pass
return DMARC_POLICY_DKIM_OUTCOME_PASS;
case 2: // Fail
return DMARC_POLICY_DKIM_OUTCOME_FAIL;
default:
return DMARC_POLICY_DKIM_OUTCOME_NONE;
}
}
dkim_result_code may have 3 or more, but dmarc.h doesn't define dkim's permerror,nxdomain or so on..?
sorry for few information.
In opendmarc-reports, it defines dkim result as follows:
switch ($dkimresult)
{
case 0 { $dkimresultstr = "pass"; }
case 2 { $dkimresultstr = "softfail"; }
case 3 { $dkimresultstr = "neutral"; }
case 4 { $dkimresultstr = "temperror"; }
case 5 { $dkimresultstr = "permerror"; }
case 6 { $dkimresultstr = "none"; }
case 7 { $dkimresultstr = "fail"; }
case 8 { $dkimresultstr = "policy"; }
case 9 { $dkimresultstr = "nxdomain"; }
case 10 { $dkimresultstr = "signed"; }
case 12 { $dkimresultstr = "discard"; }
else { $dkimresultstr = "unknown"; }
}
and our result is 0(none)/1(pass)/2(fail)、so the dkimresultstr differs what we assumed.
should we correct opendmarc-reports? or our system's result?
example of correcting opendmarc-reports : case 0 → fail、 case 1 → pass、 case 2 → none
example of correcting our system : case 0 → return 6, case 1 → return 0, case 2 → return 7
In opendmarc-reports, the count seems fixed 1, but real rua report, the count can be more than 1.
What is correct, and how can I change the count?
I am implementing DMARC, and I have some troubles follows:
so the interval(The difference between start and end) can be 3,600 to 172,800 and in reports, date_range is like this:
Is it correct date_range? and the contents should be included that range, not [end-86400]?
for example, if ri=3600, the contents should be included 1650243662(2022-04-18 10:01:02) and 1650247262(2022-04-18 11:01:02),
not 1650160862(2022-04-17 11:01:02) and 1650247262(2022-04-18 11:01:02)?
if the period is 1 hour, should the content of report is between now and 1 hour ago? or between now and 1 day ago?
In the other words, if the period is 36 hours, should the content of report is between now and 36 hours ago? or between now and 1 day ago?
In our report, the content seems it doesn't matter about period. 1 day fixed.
here is the code which get dkim status.
and in opendmarc, dmarc.h defines follows:
dkim_result_code may have 3 or more, but dmarc.h doesn't define dkim's permerror,nxdomain or so on..?
sorry for few information.
and our result is 0(none)/1(pass)/2(fail)、so the dkimresultstr differs what we assumed.
should we correct opendmarc-reports? or our system's result?
example of correcting opendmarc-reports : case 0 → fail、 case 1 → pass、 case 2 → none
example of correcting our system : case 0 → return 6, case 1 → return 0, case 2 → return 7
What is correct, and how can I change the count?
in source code:
sample of other rua report 1:
sample of other rua report 2:
I apology lack of explanation. and I hope you can answer my question.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: