From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Ryabitsev <mricon@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] regulator fixes for v5.3
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:19:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190806131925.GC4527@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADWXX_DXyBx5soZdYMcGtVB-MFhCy0C590ez=OH09eA+c1Kvw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1998 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 11:42:29AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Adding Konstantin.
> these got marked as spam once again, because
>
> dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org
>
> and I think it's because you have
>
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
> d=sirena.org.uk;
>
> but then you have
>
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
>
> so the DKIM signature is all correct, but it's correct for
> sirena.org.uk, not for the sender information..
Well, AFAICT this is your mail provider deciding to impose their own
requirements on things. (and for clarity it's only the From: that has
kernel.org, the envelope sender has sirena.org.uk.)
The DKIM signature there says that the sirena.org.uk systems are
asserting that they take responsibility for the headers they sign, this
is true and says nothing about the content of those headers other than
you can tell if they were modified since leaving sirena.org.uk. The
DMARC check is a separate one based on the domain reported in the
address, kernel.org has one which explicitly advertises having no policy
and only filtering 1% of outbound mail so shouldn't really mean anything
for processing. DMARC can flag that there has to be a DKIM signature
from the domain in the headers but kernel.org doesn't do that.
We *do* have a SPF record for kernel.org which I think isn't helping
since it flags all hosts as being SOFTFAIL (the last match is ~all)
which is supposed to be something along the lines of accept but flag, I
can see your provider deciding that spam is the appropriate tag there.
As far as I can see that'd also flag mail sent by things like the
patchwork tracker bot similarly (it sends from mail.kernel.org which
isn't advertised as a sender).
I suspect Google will only be happy if I inject mail through them,
possibly also if I filter kernel.org mail to redirect via kernel.org
though that might still trip them up.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-06 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-05 14:34 Mark Brown
2019-08-05 18:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-08-06 13:19 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2019-08-05 19:00 ` pr-tracker-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190806131925.GC4527@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mricon@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®