draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-05.txt   draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-06.txt 
Network Working Group M. Kucherawy Network Working Group M. Kucherawy
Internet-Draft July 21, 2014 Internet-Draft August 5, 2014
Updates: 7208 (if approved) Updates: 7208 (if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: January 22, 2015 Expires: February 6, 2015
Email Authentication Status Codes Email Authentication Status Codes
draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-05 draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-06
Abstract Abstract
There is at present no way to return a status code to an email client This document registers code points to allow status codes to be
that indicates a message is being rejected or deferred specifically returned to an email client to indicate that a message is being
because of email authentication failures. This document registers rejected or deferred specifically because of email authentication
codes for this purpose. failures.
This document updates [RFC7208] since some of the code points
registered replace the ones recommended for use in that document.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 22, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 6, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 12 skipping to change at page 2, line 15
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Key Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Key Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. New Enhanced Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. New Enhanced Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. DKIM Failure Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. DKIM Failure Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. SPF Failure Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. SPF Failure Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Reverse DNS Failure Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.3. Reverse DNS Failure Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Multiple Authentication Failures Code . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4. Multiple Authentication Failures Code . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC3463] introduced Enhanced Mail System Status Codes, and [RFC5248] [RFC3463] introduced Enhanced Mail System Status Codes, and [RFC5248]
created an IANA registry for these. created an IANA registry for these.
[RFC6376] and [RFC7208] introduced, respectively, DomainKeys [RFC6376] and [RFC7208] introduced, respectively, DomainKeys
Identified Mail (DKIM) and Sender Policy Framework (SPF), two Identified Mail (DKIM) and Sender Policy Framework (SPF), two
protocols for conducting message authentication. Another common protocols for conducting message authentication. Another common
skipping to change at page 3, line 41 skipping to change at page 3, line 41
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119]. [RFC2119].
3. New Enhanced Status Codes 3. New Enhanced Status Codes
The following new enhanced status codes are defined: The following new enhanced status codes are defined:
3.1. DKIM Failure Codes 3.1. DKIM Failure Codes
In the code point definitions below, the term "acceptable" means both
of the following:
a. The signature passed the basic DKIM verification algorithm as
defined in [RFC6376]; and
b. The signature satisfied any local policy requirements in addition
to the basic algorithm (e.g., certain header fields included in
the signed content, no partial signatures, etc.).
Code: X.7.20 Code: X.7.20
Sample Text: No valid DKIM signature found Sample Text: No valid DKIM signature found
Associated basic status code: 550 Associated basic status code: 550
Description: This status code is returned when a message Description: This status code is returned when a message
did not contain a valid DKIM signature, did not contain any acceptable DKIM
contrary to local policy requirements. signatures. (Note that this violates the
(Note that this violates the advice of advice of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)
Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)
Reference: [this document]; RFC6376 Reference: [this document]; RFC6376
Submitter: M. Kucherawy Submitter: M. Kucherawy
Change controller: IESG Change controller: IESG
Code: X.7.21 Code: X.7.21
Sample Text: No valid author-matched DKIM signature found Sample Text: No valid author-matched DKIM signature found
Associated basic status code: 550 Associated basic status code: 550
Description: This status code is returned when a message Description: This status code is returned when a message
did not contain a valid DKIM signature did not contain any acceptable DKIM
whose identifier(s) match the author signatures whose identifier(s) match the
address(es) found in the From header field, author address(es) found in the From header
contrary to local policy requirements. (Note field. (Note that this violates the advice
that this violates the advice of Section 6.1 of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.) This is a
of RFC6376.) special case of the X.7.20 status code.
Reference: [this document]; RFC6376 Reference: [this document]; RFC6376
Submitter: M. Kucherawy Submitter: M. Kucherawy
Change controller: IESG Change controller: IESG
3.2. SPF Failure Codes 3.2. SPF Failure Codes
Code: X.7.22 Code: X.7.22
Sample Text: SPF validation failed Sample Text: SPF validation failed
Associated basic status code: 550 Associated basic status code: 550
Description: This status code is returned when a message Description: This status code is returned when a message
skipping to change at page 6, line 35 skipping to change at page 6, line 50
Use of these codes reveals local policy with respect to email Use of these codes reveals local policy with respect to email
authentication, which can be useful information to actors attempting authentication, which can be useful information to actors attempting
to deliver undesired mail. It should be noted that there is no to deliver undesired mail. It should be noted that there is no
specific obligation to use these codes; if an operator wishes not to specific obligation to use these codes; if an operator wishes not to
reveal this aspect of local policy, it can continue using a generic reveal this aspect of local policy, it can continue using a generic
result code such as 5.7.7, 5.7.1, or even 5.7.0. result code such as 5.7.7, 5.7.1, or even 5.7.0.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
Registration of new enhanced status codes, for addition to the SMTP Registration of new enhanced status codes, for addition to the
Enhanced Status Codes Registry, can be found in Section 3. Enumerated Stauts Codes sub-registry of the SMTP Enhanced Status
Codes Registry, can be found in Section 3.
7. Normative References 7. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3463] Vaudreuil, G., "Enhanced Mail System Status Codes", [RFC3463] Vaudreuil, G., "Enhanced Mail System Status Codes",
RFC 3463, January 2003. RFC 3463, January 2003.
[RFC5248] Hansen, T. and J. Klensin, "A Registry for SMTP Enhanced [RFC5248] Hansen, T. and J. Klensin, "A Registry for SMTP Enhanced
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
22 lines changed or deleted 36 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/