Yes it is a known bug in Gmail implementation that we will fix in the next few weeks.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Nick Semenkovich <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks to some help from Tim Draegen at dmarcian.com, apparently this > is a known bug that's triggered whenever DMARC policies are updated. > > - Nick > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Nick Semenkovich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Both. The subject lines in the e-mail, as well as the report_id in the > > XML, are identical (while the contents are different). > > > > I was originally assuming the files were the same (and just sent > > twice), before I noticed two that came in with very different file > > sizes. > > > > > > Here's an example pair: > > http://web.mit.edu/semenko/Public/dmarc-dup-id/ > > > > (I've renamed one to _2.xml, otherwise the file names would be > identical.) > > > > - Nick > > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Franck Martin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> And are we talking about the report id in the xml file or the one in the > >> subject line? > >> > >> From: Roland Turner <[email protected]> > >> Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 5:41 PM > >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, > >> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC Report ID Collisions from Google > >> > >> Are the contents identical? > >> > >> ----- Reply message ----- > >> From: "Nick Semenkovich" <[email protected]> > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Subject: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC Report ID Collisions from Google > >> Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2012 22:16 > >> > >> > >> I've been intermittently (but consistently) receiving reports from > >> Google with DMARC Report ID collisions. > >> > >> In this case, I happened to just change a policy (from pct=25 to > >> pct=50), though I think this has happened with no policy changes. > >> > >> Is this the expected behavior (or has anyone else seen this)? I > >> figured the Report ID should be unique. > >> > >> Example Report ID: 11506581618641335025 (from Google) > >> > >> Best, > >> Nick > >> > >> -- > >> Nick Semenkovich > >> Laboratory of Dr. Jeffrey I. Gordon > >> Medical Scientist Training Program > >> School of Medicine > >> Washington University in St. Louis > >> 314.362.3963 (Lab) > >> http://web.mit.edu/semenko/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dmarc-discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > >> > >> NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > >> terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) > > > > > > > > -- > > Nick Semenkovich > > Laboratory of Dr. Jeffrey I. Gordon > > Medical Scientist Training Program > > School of Medicine > > Washington University in St. Louis > > 314.362.3963 (Lab) > > http://web.mit.edu/semenko/ > > > > -- > Nick Semenkovich > Laboratory of Dr. Jeffrey I. Gordon > Medical Scientist Training Program > School of Medicine > Washington University in St. Louis > 314.362.3963 (Lab) > http://web.mit.edu/semenko/ > _______________________________________________ > dmarc-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) >
_______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
