[opendmarc-dev] OpenDMARC 1.3.2.Beta1 available

[Steve Jenkins]

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Juri Haberland <juri at sapienti-sat.org>
wrote:

> Hey Murray,
>
> good to see you working again on OpenDMARC. Much appreciated!
> Hope you will enjoy your vacations and "recharge your batteries" ;)
>
> Some comments, though:
>
> On 18.12.2016 11:12, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> >       LIBOPENDMARC: Fix bug #165: Fix logic in checking which SPF
> >               identifier was used.  Patch from Marco Favero.
>
> The way you adapted Marco's patch missed one fix, please look at ticket 165
> again - I posted a patch that adds the missing bit
> (ticket165_incomplete.patch).
>
> Furthermore I'm missing the following patches, which are running here in
> production for several month now without problems and at least two of them
> are critical (actually, without #187 beta0/1 can't be compiled, and without
> #185 it can't be run without segfaulting).
>
> #95   SPF validation fail for ipv6
> #166  wrong report start and end times in DMARC reports
> #185  Segfaults every connection attempts
> #187  compile and functional fix for SPF result logging


Juri:

I swapped some FB msgs with MSK this morning, and he'll likely be offline
until after the holidays.

I've updated my patch status spreadsheet here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bhlYp_A6j_NF6I9cEAoHsYJV06ooEjkDlsMo9v67mtQ/edit?usp=sharing

I show the following are still missing from Beta1, which one could argue
should be included:

#95
#153 (MSK says will follow up in a later version)
#159
#165_incomplete
#166
#179
#185
#187
#193

I've got it compiling on Fedora with all the above patches except for #159,
#179, and #193. Including any of those causes automake problems on Fedora
25.

I think a patch for #159 and #179 should be combined, since they touch the
same file.

SteveJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.trusteddomain.org/pipermail/opendmarc-dev/attachments/20161218/3452a3cc/attachment.htm>